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.

36/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Forecasted outcomes are compared with outcomes observed on candidate drugs, thus replacing a concomitant placebo group. Results ADAScog scores after 24 months are predicted from gender, obesity, Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ) and baseline scores of Mini-Mental State Examination, ADAScog and NP-Batt with an R2 of 0.63 and a residual standard deviation of 0.67, allowing reasonably precise estimates of sample means. It is suggested that the PGSA may complement RPCT designs in forthcoming long-term drug studies with presymptomatic AD individuals.

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

APA 7th

Spiegel, R., Berres, M., Miserez, A. R., Monsch, A. U., & Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. (2011). For debate: substituting placebo controls in long-term Alzheimer's prevention trials. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/alzrt68

Vancouver

Spiegel R, Berres M, Miserez AR, Monsch AU, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. For debate: substituting placebo controls in long-term Alzheimer's prevention trials. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2011. doi:10.1186/alzrt68. PMID: 21418632.

BibTeX

@article{spiegel2011-21418632,
  author  = {Spiegel, R. and Berres, M. and Miserez, A. R. and Monsch, A. U. and {Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
  title   = {{For debate: substituting placebo controls in long-term Alzheimer's prevention trials}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
  year    = {2011},
  doi     = {10.1186/alzrt68},
  pmid    = {21418632},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/alzrt68}
}

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

Forecasted outcomes are compared with outcomes observed on candidate drugs, thus replacing a concomitant placebo group.
Results ADAScog scores after 24 months are predicted from gender, obesity, Functional Assessment Questionnaire (FAQ) and baseline scores of Mini-Mental State Examination, ADAScog and NP-Batt with an R2 of 0.63 and a residual standard deviation of 0.67, allowing reasonably precise estimates of sample means.
It is suggested that the PGSA may complement RPCT designs in forthcoming long-term drug studies with presymptomatic AD individuals.

Why it matters

This paper proposes using forecasted outcomes from historical data to partially replace placebo groups in long-term Alzheimer's prevention trials. It suggests this approach may complement randomized placebo-controlled trial designs in future studies with presymptomatic individuals.

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

Study details

Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 36/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 35 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy)
Journal's citation record	1 / 4	Alzheimer s Research & Therapy: journal h-index 146 (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	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	2011 — 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)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	3 / 7	Cited 15 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	0 / 5	0.9 citations a year over 17 year(s) since 2011
Impact for its field and year	1 / 6	Cited 1.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 3 other studies in this library
Still being cited	0 / 4	Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	0 / 3	University Hospital of Basel: institution h-index 594 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21418632)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	35 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 35 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100.
Total	36 / 100	—

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 19.

Later studies that cite this one

3 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Treatments

Also tagged “double-blind”

783 studies in the library carry the topic tag “double-blind”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 783 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →