ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2026
Neuropathology-specific language features in primary progressive aphasia.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPrimary Progressive Aphasia (PPA) clinical syndromes do not align consistently with underlying pathology. This study aimed to identify language markers for specific neuropathologies using both standard clinical tests and narrative speech analysis.
methodsWe analyzed data from 82 autopsy-confirmed PPA cases, including Alzheimer's disease (AD), transactive DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) type C (TDP-C), Pick's disease, and 4R-tauopathies (progressive supranuclear palsy/ cortico-basal degeneration (PSP/CBD). Linear mixed-effects regression was used to analyze performance on standardized aphasia tests and narrative speech variables.
resultsTDP-C showed severe semantic deficits but high fluency, while AD was distinguished by impaired repetition. Narrative analysis differentiated 4R-Tauopathies: CBD patients demonstrated significantly poorer syntax and irregular verb inflection than PSP or Pick's, whereas PSP showed the lowest fluency. DISCUSSION: While standard tests effectively capture lexical-semantic features in AD and TDP-C, narrative measures reveal subtle grammatical and fluency differences critical for distinguishing specific tauopathies. This study outlines a more robust approach for predicting underlying pathology in PPA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.