ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Clinical tools to differentiate behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia from phenocopies.
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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBehavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is often misdiagnosed, particularly in psychiatric phenocopies of the disease (phFTD). We compared the top-performing bvFTD-specific behavioral tools, identified in a prior systematic review, for differentiating bvFTD from phFTD.
methodsIn this prospective diagnostic accuracy study, consecutively recruited participants with suspected bvFTD by a specialist physician completed nine bvFTD-specific tools at baseline with a blinded assessor. Final diagnoses were assigned by multidisciplinary consensus after follow-up. Diagnostic performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analyses.
resultsFifty-one participants were included (25 bvFTD, 26 phFTD). The Frontotemporal Dementia versus Primary Psychiatric Disorder (FTDvsPPD) checklist showed the best discrimination (area under the curve [AUC] 0.92), with 80.0% sensitivity and 96.2% specificity. The Social Behavior Observer Checklist (SBOC) performed next best (AUC 0.85). The Informant Based Questionnaire and Pick's Disease Scale showed moderate discrimination and other tools performed poorly. DISCUSSION: Tools focused on clinician observation outperformed informant-reliant measures. The FTDvsPPD checklist showed the strongest rule-in and rule-out utility, while the SBOC provided useful rule-in support.
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.