ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2026
Towards a Multidimensional Model of Neurocognitive Disorders (MOND Model): Integrating Evidence from a Critical Review into a Model for Future Research.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sex-Specific Structural Vulnerability in Alzheimer's Disease: Insights from APOE ε 4-Negative Patients.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main purpose of this work is to critically review the literature on neurocognitive disorders (ND) diagnosis. A critical review was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCO. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses focusing on ND diagnosis were included. The selected studies were critically analyzed and conceptually integrated to identify relevant dimensions for the diagnosis of ND. The review included 88 studies. Most studies focused on Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment. The literature remained predominantly centred on isolated diagnostic domains, and important limitations were consistently identified, including methodological heterogeneity, lack of standardized thresholds, and reduced clinical applicability. Based on the identified conceptual and methodological limitations, a Multidimensional Model of Neurocognitive Disorders (MOND model) for ND diagnosis was proposed. The MOND model was developed as a multidimensional, multilevel, transdiagnostic model integrating biological, neurocognitive, neuropsychiatric, motor, functional, frailty, reserve-related, and socio-environmental dimensions. The model may contribute to research, symptom classification, severity characterization, prognosis, and personalized intervention planning across different ND trajectories. Future studies using the MOND model should focus on refining algorithms to estimate the risk of ND.
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.