Home › Research › What the research found › Every row
Every row of the evidence table
One row per finding: what was tested, which way the result went, and how the study was built. The answer by area, and where the studies disagree, are on the main page.
Every row
Filter
Showing 5 of 382 rows. One row per study per exposure: a study that tested two different things appears twice, once for each.
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
| Exposure | Question | Direction | Outcome measured | Design | People | Effect size, as the source reported it | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blood biomarker test (p-tau217 / amyloid ratio) Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Benefit
whyDirection is for the test's accuracy against the reference standard; an accuracy result, not a health outcome. Plasma p-tau217 detected amyloid PET positivity with 82% sensitivity and 86% specificity, comparable to CSF p-tau217; less sensitive for tau PET. |
Sensitivity and specificity for amyloid and tau PET positivity (pooled) | meta-analysis | not stated | Plasma p-tau217 showed 82% sensitivity for detecting amyloid and 83% for tau, with 86% and 83% specificity, respectively. CSF p-tau217 had 79% sensitivity for amyloid and 91% for tau, with 91% and 84% specificity |
Alzheimer's & Dementia
2025 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 39711334 |
| Blood biomarker test (p-tau217 / amyloid ratio) Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Benefit
whyDirection is for the test's accuracy against the reference standard; an accuracy result, not a health outcome. Plasma p-tau217 was the best-performing marker (88.1% sensitivity, 88.7% specificity, AUROC 91.1%, moderate certainty), ahead of p-tau181 and p-tau231; about 90% of studies were at high risk of bias. |
Pooled sensitivity, specificity and AUROC for biologically defined Alzheimer's disease | meta-analysis | 29,625 | Plasma p-tau217 was the highest-performing biomarker for identifying biologically defined Alzheimer's disease, with pooled sensitivity of 88·1% (95% CI 86·7-89·5, moderate certainty of evidence), specificity of 88·7% (87·4-89·9, moderate certainty of evidence), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 91·1% (88·9-92·4, moderate certainty of evidence), and diagnostic odds ratio of 50·7 (40·6-63·4). p-tau181 pooled sensitivity was 80·5% (78·4-82·4, low certainty of evidence), specificity was 76·4% (74·1-78·6, low certainty of evidence), AUROC was 81·5% (80·2-82·9, low certainty of evidence) |
The Lancet Neurology
2025 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 40818474 |
| Carer psychosocial / skills intervention Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Benefit
whyBenefit was larger for younger, male and non-spousal carers. The largest single effect (training the person with dementia) rests on 10 observations and the authors call it promising rather than definitive. |
Carer anxiety and depression | meta-analysis | not stated | "Interventions generally showed a significant reduction in anxiety and depression with varied effects on SWB [subjective well-being]" across 175 studies and 342 intervention treatments |
Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders
2026 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 40550226 |
| Carer psychosocial / skills intervention Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Benefit
whyDigital psychological interventions reduced caregiver burden and improved self-efficacy and quality of life; the effect on depressive symptoms was not statistically significant (P = .06). |
Caregiver burden (primary); depression, self-efficacy and quality of life | meta-analysis | 750 | digital psychological interventions significantly reduced caregiver burden [Standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.21, 95% CI: -0.35 to -0.07; P = .003] and improved self-efficacy (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.61, P = .001) and quality of life (SMD = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.91, P < .001). But digital psychological interventions have no statistically significant in alleviating depressive symptoms (P = .06) |
Age and ageing
2026 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 41505195 |
| Cognitive screening instrument accuracy Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Benefit
whyDirection is for the test's accuracy against the reference standard; an accuracy result, not a health outcome. Pooled sensitivity 76% and specificity 83% for dementia, with 73% / 84% in primary care; the authors call it a practical screening tool while noting high or unclear risk of bias in patient selection and timing. |
Pooled sensitivity and specificity of the Mini-Cog for dementia, MCI and cognitive impairment | meta-analysis | not stated | To detect dementia (six studies, n = 4772), the Mini-Cog showed 76% sensitivity and 83% specificity. To detect MCI (two studies, n = 270), it showed 84% sensitivity and 79% specificity. To detect CI (eight studies, n = 2152), it had 67% sensitivity and 83% specificity. In the primary care setting, to detect either MCI, dementia, or CI (eight studies, n = 5620), the Mini-Cog demonstrated 73% sensitivity and 84% specificity |
PLOS ONE
2024 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 38483857 |