Accuracy of the Clinical Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease at National Institute on Aging Alzheimer Disease Centers, 2005–2010
Clicks: 21
ID: 299050
2012
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
6.0
/100
21 views
1 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #10 of 41 articles by views in Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The neuropathologic examination is considered to provide the gold standard for Alzheimer disease (AD). To determine the accuracy of currently used clinical diagnostic methods, clinical and neuropathologic data from the National Alzheimers Coordinating Center, which gathers information from the network of National Institute on Aging (NIA)-sponsored Alzheimer Disease Centers (ADCs), were collected as part of the National Alzheimers Coordinating Center Uniform Data Set (UDS) between 2005 and 2010. A database search initially included all 1198 subjects with at least one UDS clinical assessment and who had died and been autopsied; 279 were excluded as being not demented or because critical data fields were missing. The final subject number was 919. Sensitivity and specificity were determined based on probable and possible AD levels of clinical confidence and 4 levels of neuropathologic confidence based on varying neuritic plaque densities and Braak neurofibrillary stages. Sensitivity ranged from 70.9% to 87.3%; specificity ranged from 44.3% to 70.8%. Sensitivity was generally increased with more permissive clinical criteria and specificity was increased with more restrictive criteria, whereas the opposite was true for neuropathologic criteria. When a clinical diagnosis was not confirmed by minimum levels of AD histopathology, the most frequent primary neuropathologic diagnoses were tangle-only dementia or argyrophilic grain disease, frontotemporal lobar degeneration, cerebrovascular disease, Lewy body disease and hippocampal sclerosis. When dementia was not clinically diagnosed as AD, 39% of these cases met or exceeded minimum threshold levels of AD histopathology. Neurologists of the NIA-ADCs had higher predictive accuracy when they diagnosed AD in subjects with dementia than when they diagnosed dementing diseases other than AD. The misdiagnosis rate should be considered when estimating subject numbers for AD studies, including clinical trials and epidemiologic studies.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W1974300727
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Thomas G. Beach, Sarah E. Monsell, Leslie E. Phillips, Walter A. Kukull |
| Journal | Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology |
| Year | 2012 |
| DOI |
10.1097/nen.0b013e31824b211b
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.