Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease
Zaven S. Khachaturian. Archives of Neurology, 1985-11-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Early and accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has a major impact on the progress of research on dementia. To address the problems involved in diagnosing AD in its earliest stages, the National Institute on Aging, the American Association of Retired Persons, the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke, and the National Institute of Mental Health jointly sponsored a workshop for planning research. The purpose of the meeting was to identify the most important scientific research opportunities and the crucial clinical and technical issues that influence the progress of research on the diagnosis of AD. The 37 participants included some of the most knowledgeable and eminent scientists and physicians actively involved in the study of AD. The participants were divided among six panels representing the disciplines of neurochemistry, neuropathology, neuroradiology, neurology, neuropsychology, and psychiatry. Within each of the panels, participants discussed specific areas of research requiring further
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Khachaturian, Z. S. (1985). Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease. Archives of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1985.04060100083029
Vancouver
Khachaturian ZS. Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease. Archives of Neurology. 1985. doi:10.1001/archneur.1985.04060100083029. PMID: 1953835.
BibTeX
@article{khachaturian1985-1953835,
author = {Khachaturian, Zaven S.},
title = {{Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease}},
journal = {Archives of Neurology},
year = {1985},
doi = {10.1001/archneur.1985.04060100083029},
pmid = {1953835},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1985.04060100083029}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- To address the problems involved in diagnosing AD in its earliest stages, the National Institute on Aging, the American Association of Retired Persons, the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke, and the National Institute of Mental Health jointly sponsored a workshop for planning research.
- The purpose of the meeting was to identify the most important scientific research opportunities and the crucial clinical and technical issues that influence the progress of research on the diagnosis of AD.
- The 37 participants included some of the most knowledgeable and eminent scientists and physicians actively involved in the study of AD.
- The participants were divided among six panels representing the disciplines of neurochemistry, neuropathology, neuroradiology, neurology, neuropsychology, and psychiatry.
- Within each of the panels, participants discussed specific areas of research requiring further
Why it matters
This report describes a workshop that identified research opportunities and clinical issues influencing progress on diagnosing Alzheimer's disease, especially in its earliest stages. It does not test a treatment or cure, but focuses on improving diagnosis to support research.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Participants37
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 58/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on institution's track record, so that was left out: it earned 56 of the 97 points we could judge it on, which is 58 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Archives of Neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | 3 / 4 | Archives of Neurology: journal h-index 353 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 1985 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 37 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) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 7 / 7 | Cited 2,495 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 5 / 5 | 58.0 citations a year over 43 year(s) since 1985 |
| Impact for its field and year | 5 / 6 | Cited 37.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 5 / 6 | Cited by 105 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 63 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Zaven S. Khachaturian: h-index 56 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 1953835) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 56 / 97 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 56 of the 97 points we could judge it on is 58 out of 100. |
| Total | 58 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.
Later studies that cite this one
105 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Getting a diagnosis
Also in Getting a diagnosis
141 studies in the library are filed under Getting a diagnosis with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Getting a diagnosis hub.