Topic: Genetics and APOE
In the search for new genes in Alzheimer's disease, classic linkage-based and candidate-gene-based association studies have been supplanted by exome sequencing, genome-wide sequencing (for mendelian forms of Alzheimer's disease), and genome-wide association studies (for non-mendelian forms). The identification of new susceptibility genes has opened new avenues for exploration of the underlying disease mechanisms. In addition to detecting novel risk factors in large samples, next-generation sequencing approaches can deliver novel insights with even small numbers of patients. The shift in focus towards translational studies and sequencing of individual patients places each patient's biomaterials as the central unit of genetic studies. The notional shift needed to make the patient central to genetic studies will necessitate strong collaboration and input from clinical neurologists.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Bettens, K., Sleegers, K., & Van Broeckhoven, C. (2013). Genetic insights in Alzheimer's disease. The Lancet. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70259-4
Vancouver
Bettens K, Sleegers K, Van Broeckhoven C. Genetic insights in Alzheimer's disease. The Lancet. Neurology. 2013. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70259-4. PMID: 23237904.
BibTeX
@article{bettens2013-23237904,
author = {Bettens, K. and Sleegers, K. and Van Broeckhoven, C.},
title = {{Genetic insights in Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {The Lancet. Neurology},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70259-4},
pmid = {23237904},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(12)70259-4}
}
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
- In the search for new genes in Alzheimer's disease, classic linkage-based and candidate-gene-based association studies have been supplanted by exome sequencing, genome-wide sequencing (for mendelian forms of Alzheimer's disease), and genome-wide association studies (for non-mendelian forms).
- The identification of new susceptibility genes has opened new avenues for exploration of the underlying disease mechanisms.
- In addition to detecting novel risk factors in large samples, next-generation sequencing approaches can deliver novel insights with even small numbers of patients.
- The shift in focus towards translational studies and sequencing of individual patients places each patient's biomaterials as the central unit of genetic studies.
- The notional shift needed to make the patient central to genetic studies will necessitate strong collaboration and input from clinical neurologists.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a leading specialty 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 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 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet. Neurology) |
| 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 | 1 / 5 | 2013 — 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 | — / 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 23237904) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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 Genetics
Also tagged “genetics”
346 studies in the library carry the topic tag “genetics”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 346 tagged studies.