This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

80/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 80 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Clusters with diffuse or frontal-predominant cortical thinning, but with more favourable vascular profiles, characterized by lower blood pressure and reduced obesity, showed significantly less cortical thinning (mean thickness, AD-signature, and resilience-signature regions; all p < 0.05) following the intervention. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Stratifying at-risk individuals by GM patterns and vascular risk revealed differential brain responses to the FINGER intervention. These findings underscore the value of brain-based subtyping to optimize personalized dementia prevention strategies in heterogeneous at-risk populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01041989.

Key findings

Clusters with diffuse or frontal-predominant cortical thinning, but with more favourable vascular profiles, characterized by lower blood pressure and reduced obesity, showed significantly less cortical thinning (mean thickness, AD-signature, and resilience-signature regions; all p < 0.05) following the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Stratifying at-risk individuals by GM patterns and vascular risk revealed differential brain responses to the FINGER intervention.
These findings underscore the value of brain-based subtyping to optimize personalized dementia prevention strategies in heterogeneous at-risk populations.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01041989.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →

Study details

Study designrandomized controlled trial
Participants120
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 80/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 45 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 80 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	11 / 12	A randomised controlled trial
Strength of evidence	5 / 5	Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	4 / 5	2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	120 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded	1 / 2	Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40998691)
Free to read	— / 2	Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points	45 / 56	Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 45 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 80 out of 100.
Total	80 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Lorenzon, G., Marseglia, A., Mohanty, R., Lehtisalo, J., Poulakis, K., Ngandu, T., et al. (2025). Brain patterns and risk factors in the FINGER RCT multimodal lifestyle intervention. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjpad.2025.100390

Vancouver

Lorenzon G, Marseglia A, Mohanty R, Lehtisalo J, Poulakis K, Ngandu T, et al. Brain patterns and risk factors in the FINGER RCT multimodal lifestyle intervention. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.tjpad.2025.100390. PMID: 40998691.

BibTeX

@article{lorenzon2025-40998691,
  author  = {Lorenzon, Giulia and Marseglia, Anna and Mohanty, Rosaleena and Lehtisalo, Jenni and Poulakis, Konstantinos and Ngandu, Tiia and Solomon, Alina and Kivipelto, Miia and others},
  title   = {{Brain patterns and risk factors in the FINGER RCT multimodal lifestyle intervention}},
  journal = {The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.tjpad.2025.100390},
  pmid    = {40998691},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tjpad.2025.100390}
}

Related studies in Prevention trials

Also tagged “metabolic-syndrome”

304 studies in the library carry the topic tag “metabolic-syndrome”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 304 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →