Home › Research › Tau biomarkers
EFNS-ENS Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of disorders associated with dementia
Sorbi S, Hort J, Erkinjuntti T, Fladby T, Gainotti G, Gurvit H, Nacmias B, Pasquier F et al.. European journal of neurology, 2012-09-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background and objectives The last version of the EFNS dementia guidelines is from 2007. In 2010, the revised guidelines for Alzheimer's disease (AD) were published. The current guidelines involve the revision of the dementia syndromes outside of AD, notably vascular cognitive impairment, frontotemporal lobar degeneration, dementia with Lewy bodies, corticobasal syndrome, progressive supranuclear palsy, Parkinson's disease dementia, Huntington's disease, prion diseases, normal-pressure hydrocephalus, limbic encephalitis and other toxic and metabolic disorders. The aim is to present a peer-reviewed evidence-based statement for the guidance of practice for clinical neurologists, geriatricians, psychiatrists and other specialist physicians responsible for the care of patients with dementing disorders. It represents a statement of minimum desirable standards for practice guidance. Methods The task force working group reviewed evidence from original research articles, meta-analyses and systematic reviews, published by June 2011. The evidence was classified (I, II, III, IV) and consensus recommendations graded (A, B, or C) according to the EFNS guidance. Where there was a lack of evidence, but clear consensus, good practice points were provided. Results and conclusions New recommendations and good practice points are made for clinical diagnosis, blood tests, neuropsychology, neuroimaging, electroencephalography, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis, genetic testing, disclosure of diagnosis, treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia, legal issues, counselling and support for caregivers. All recommendations were revised as compared with the previous EFNS guidelines. The specialist neurologist together with primary care physicians play an important role in the assessment, interpretation and treatment of symptoms, disability and needs of dementia patients.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Sorbi, S., Hort, J., Erkinjuntti, T., Fladby, T., Gainotti, G., Gurvit, H., et al. (2012). EFNS-ENS Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of disorders associated with dementia. European journal of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2012.03784.x
Vancouver
Sorbi S, Hort J, Erkinjuntti T, Fladby T, Gainotti G, Gurvit H, et al. EFNS-ENS Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of disorders associated with dementia. European journal of neurology. 2012. doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2012.03784.x. PMID: 22891773.
BibTeX
@article{sorbi2012-22891773,
author = {Sorbi, S. and Hort, J. and Erkinjuntti, T. and Fladby, T. and Gainotti, G. and Gurvit, H. and Nacmias, B. and Pasquier, F. and others},
title = {{EFNS-ENS Guidelines on the diagnosis and management of disorders associated with dementia}},
journal = {European journal of neurology},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1111/j.1468-1331.2012.03784.x},
pmid = {22891773},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-1331.2012.03784.x}
}
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
- Results and conclusions New recommendations and good practice points are made for clinical diagnosis, blood tests, neuropsychology, neuroimaging, electroencephalography, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis, genetic testing, disclosure of diagnosis, treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia, legal issues, counselling and support for caregivers.
- All recommendations were revised as compared with the previous EFNS guidelines.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 64/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (European journal of neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2012 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22891773) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 37 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100. |
| Total | 64 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Tau biomarkers
Also tagged “management”
6 studies in the library carry the topic tag “management”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 6 tagged studies.