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.

63/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Disease mechanisms

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Objective To determine whether CN individuals with SNAP show evidence of early Alzheimer disease (AD) processes (ie, elevated tau levels and/or increased risk for cognitive decline). Results Of the 247 participants (142 women [57.5%]; 105 men [42.5%]; mean age, 74 [range, 63-90] years), 64 (25.9%) were classified as having SNAP. Compared with the stage 0 group, the SNAP group was not more likely to have subthreshold PiB values (higher values within the Aβ- range), suggesting that misclassification due to the PiB cutoff was not a prominent contributor to this group (mean [SD] distribution volume ratio, 1.08 [0.05] for the SNAP group; 1.09 [0.05] for the stage 1 group). Tau levels in the medial and inferior temporal lobes were indistinguishable between the SNAP and stage 0 groups (entorhinal cortex, β = -0.005 [SE, 0.036]; parahippocampal gyrus, β = -0.001 [SE, 0.027]; and inferior temporal lobe, β = -0.004 [SE, 0.027]; P ≥ .88) and were lower in the SNAP group compared with the stage 2 group (entorhinal cortex, β = -0.125 [SE, 0.041]; parahippocampal gyrus, β = -0.074 [SE, 0.030]; and inferior temporal lobe, β = -0.083 [SE, 0.031]; P ≤ .02). The stage 2 group demonstrated greater cognitive decline compared with all other groups (stage 0, β = -0.239 [SE, 0.042]; stage 1, β = -0.242 [SE, 0.051]; and SNAP, β = -0.157 [SE, 0.044]; P ≤ .001), whereas the SNAP group showed a diminished practice effect over time compared with the stage 0 group (β = -0.082 [SE, 0.037]; P = .03). Conclusions and relevance In this study, clinically normal adults with SNAP did not exhibit evidence of elevated tau levels, which suggests that this biomarker construct does not represent amyloid-independent tauopathy.

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

APA 7th

Mormino, E. C., Papp, K. V., Rentz, D. M., Schultz, A. P., LaPoint, M., Amariglio, R., et al. (2016). Heterogeneity in Suspected Non-Alzheimer Disease Pathophysiology Among Clinically Normal Older Individuals. JAMA neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.2237

Vancouver

Mormino EC, Papp KV, Rentz DM, Schultz AP, LaPoint M, Amariglio R, et al. Heterogeneity in Suspected Non-Alzheimer Disease Pathophysiology Among Clinically Normal Older Individuals. JAMA neurology. 2016. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.2237. PMID: 27548655.

BibTeX

@article{mormino2016-27548655,
  author  = {Mormino, E. C. and Papp, K. V. and Rentz, D. M. and Schultz, A. P. and LaPoint, M. and Amariglio, R. and Hanseeuw, B. and Marshall, G. A. and others},
  title   = {{Heterogeneity in Suspected Non-Alzheimer Disease Pathophysiology Among Clinically Normal Older Individuals}},
  journal = {JAMA neurology},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.2237},
  pmid    = {27548655},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2016.2237}
}

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

Objective To determine whether CN individuals with SNAP show evidence of early Alzheimer disease (AD) processes (ie, elevated tau levels and/or increased risk for cognitive decline).
Results Of the 247 participants (142 women [57.5%]; 105 men [42.5%]; mean age, 74 [range, 63-90] years), 64 (25.9%) were classified as having SNAP.
Compared with the stage 0 group, the SNAP group was not more likely to have subthreshold PiB values (higher values within the Aβ- range), suggesting that misclassification due to the PiB cutoff was not a prominent contributor to this group (mean [SD] distribution volume ratio, 1.08 [0.05] for the SNAP group; 1.09 [0.05] for the stage 1 group).
Tau levels in the medial and inferior temporal lobes were indistinguishable between the SNAP and stage 0 groups (entorhinal cortex, β = -0.005 [SE, 0.036]; parahippocampal gyrus, β = -0.001 [SE, 0.027]; and inferior temporal lobe, β = -0.004 [SE, 0.027]; P ≥ .88) and were lower in the SNAP group compared with the stage 2 group (entorhinal cortex, β = -0.125 [SE, 0.041]; parahippocampal gyrus, β = -0.074 [SE, 0.030]; and inferior temporal lobe, β = -0.083 [SE, 0.031]; P ≤ .02).
The stage 2 group demonstrated greater cognitive decline compared with all other groups (stage 0, β = -0.239 [SE, 0.042]; stage 1, β = -0.242 [SE, 0.051]; and SNAP, β = -0.157 [SE, 0.044]; P ≤ .001), whereas the SNAP group showed a diminished practice effect over time compared with the stage 0 group (β = -0.082 [SE, 0.037]; P = .03).

Why it matters

Among 247 clinically normal older adults, 64 (25.9%) were classified as having SNAP (suspected non-Alzheimer disease pathophysiology). Their tau levels in the temporal lobes were indistinguishable from the stage 0 group and lower than the stage 2 group, and the stage 2 group showed greater cognitive decline than all other groups, while the SNAP group showed a smaller practice effect over time than stage 0; the authors conclude that SNAP does not represent amyloid-independent tauopathy.

Study details

Study designlongitudinal study
Participants247
Effect size57.5%; 42.5%; 25.9%
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 63/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (JAMA neurology)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	JAMA Neurology: journal h-index 235 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	7 / 12	A longitudinal study following the same people over time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	247 participants
Effect reported	2 / 3	Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
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	4 / 7	Cited 65 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	2 / 5	5.4 citations a year over 12 year(s) since 2016
Impact for its field and year	4 / 6	Cited 10.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 6 other studies in this library
Still being cited	1 / 4	Cited 7 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	4 / 4	Last-listed author Reisa Anne Sperling: h-index 157 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	3 / 3	Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 4 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27548655)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	63 / 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 20.

Later studies that cite this one

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

Related studies in Disease mechanisms

Also tagged “machine”

835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “machine”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Disease mechanisms

See all studies in Disease mechanisms →