Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Background Alzheimer's Disease (AD) can cause degeneration in the retina and optic nerve either directly, as a result of amyloid beta deposits, or secondarily, as a result of the degradation of the visual cortex. These effects raise the possibility that tracking ophthalmologic changes in the retina can be used to assess neurodegeneration in AD. This study aimed to detect retinal changes and associated functional changes in three groups of patients consisting of AD patients with mild disease, AD patients with moderate disease and healthy controls by using non-invasive psychophysical ophthalmological tests and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods We included 39 patients with mild AD, 21 patients with moderate AD and 40 age-matched healthy controls. Both patients and controls were ophthalmologically healthy. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, colour perception, visual integration, and choroidal thicknesses were measured. In addition, OCT and OCT angiography (OCTA) were applied. Findings Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, colour perception, and visual integration were significantly lower in AD patients than in healthy controls. Compared to healthy controls, macular thinning in the central region was significant in the mild AD patients, while macular thickening in the central region was found in the moderate AD group. The analysis of macular layers revealed significant thinning of the retinal nerve fibre layer, the ganglion cell layer and the outer plexiform layer in AD patients relative to controls. Conversely, significant thickening was observed in the outer nuclear layer of the patients. However, mild AD was associated with significant thinning of the subfovea and the nasal and inferior sectors of the choroid. Significant superonasal and inferotemporal peripapillary thinning was observed in patients with moderate disease. Conclusions The first changes in the mild AD patients appear in the psychophysical tests and in the central macula with a decrease in the central retinal thickness. When there was a disease progression to moderate AD, psychophysical tests remained stable with respect to the decrease in mild AD, but significant thinning in the peripapillary retina and thickening in the central retina appeared. The presence of AD is best indicated based on contrast sensitivity.

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

APA 7th

Salobrar-García, E., de Hoz, R., Ramírez, A. I., López-Cuenca, I., Rojas, P., Vazirani, R., et al. (2019). Changes in visual function and retinal structure in the progression of Alzheimer's disease. PloS one. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220535

Vancouver

Salobrar-García E, de Hoz R, Ramírez AI, López-Cuenca I, Rojas P, Vazirani R, et al. Changes in visual function and retinal structure in the progression of Alzheimer's disease. PloS one. 2019. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0220535. PMID: 31415594.

BibTeX

@article{salobrargarcia2019-31415594,
  author  = {Salobrar-García, E. and de Hoz, R. and Ramírez, A. I. and López-Cuenca, I. and Rojas, P. and Vazirani, R. and Amarante, C. and Yubero, R. and others},
  title   = {{Changes in visual function and retinal structure in the progression of Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {PloS one},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.1371/journal.pone.0220535},
  pmid    = {31415594},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220535}
}

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.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 28 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.28 of the 58 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / blinded 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 and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (PloS one)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 39 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 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 31415594)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 28 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 28 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total 48 / 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.

Related studies in Brain scans and imaging

Also tagged “function”

7 studies in the library carry the topic tag “function”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 7 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →