Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42491111›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Visual read performance of

Ishara Paranawithana, Vincent Doré, Pierrick Bourgeat, Aurora Poon, H B Toh, Tanyaluck Thientunyakit, Tawika Kaewchur, Antony Sutherland, Ashley G Gillman, Kun Huang and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Ishara ParanawithanaThe Australian e-Health Research Centre Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Melbourne Victoria Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6509-9687
Vincent DoréThe Australian e-Health Research Centre Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Pierrick BourgeatThe Australian e-Health Research Centre Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Brisbane Queensland Australia.
Aurora PoonDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy Austin Health Melbourne Victoria Australia.
H B TohDepartment of Nuclear Medicine The Royal Melbourne Hospital Parkville Victoria Australia.
Tanyaluck ThientunyakitFaculty of Medicine, Siriraj Hospital Mahidol University Bangkok Thailand.
Tawika KaewchurPET/CT and Cyclotron Center, Faculty of Medicine Chiang Mai University Chiang Mai Thailand.
Antony SutherlandDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy Austin Health Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Ashley G GillmanThe Australian e-Health Research Centre Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Brisbane Queensland Australia.
Kun HuangDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy Austin Health Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Azadeh FeizpourDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy Austin Health Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Jurgen FrippThe Australian e-Health Research Centre Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Brisbane Queensland Australia.
Victor L VillemagneDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy Austin Health Melbourne Victoria Australia.
Christopher C RoweDepartment of Molecular Imaging & Therapy Austin Health Melbourne Victoria Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionVisual assessment remains standard practice to rule out amyloid-β (Aβ) pathology.

methodsOne hundred fifty participants in the AIBL study underwent both

resultsMean peak accuracy for visual read exceeded 95% for both NAV and FBP. However, peak accuracy for NAV visual reads was achieved at 14-15CL compared to 38-46CL for FBP. Higher inter-reader agreement was observed for NAV compared to FBP. DISCUSSION: For mild to moderate elevation in Aβ, visual read of NAV is more sensitive and consistent than visual read of FBP by both experienced and novice readers.

Indexed as

Alzheimer's diseaseamyloid imagingcentiloid quantificationflorbetapirNAV4694positron emission tomographyvisual reads

Identifiers

PMID42491111
PMCPMC13375940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.