Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. How common it is

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

We increased the findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability (FAIR) status of the cohorts through harmonization of data across cohorts, implementation of medical imaging repositories for scan management, implementation of the Personal Health Train infrastructure and provision of meta-data in existing cohort catalogues. We established the ethical and legal frameworks required for federated and pooled analyses and performed the first remote federated data analyses using the Personal Health Train infrastructure. To determine biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease, endothelial dysfunction and inflammation, 2554 plasma samples were analyzed centrally. Federated, pooled, and coordinated meta-analyses have led to multiple publications in the context of NCDC. The combination of population-based and clinical cohorts, the coordinated assessment of plasma markers in previously collected samples and implementation and use of the Personal Health Train infrastructure for federated analysis are both feasible and promising for future collaborative efforts.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: High

This is a pooled review. This consortium harmonized data across Dutch dementia cohorts and carried out federated analyses, including central analysis of plasma samples for biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease, endothelial dysfunction and inflammation. It shows that this collaborative infrastructure is feasible and promising for future research, but reports no treatment or prevention outcome.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

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

APA 7th

Oomens, J. E., Moonen, J. E. F., Vos, S. J. B., Beran, M., Mateus, P., De Deyn, P. P., et al. (2025). Identifying pathways to the prevention of dementia: the Netherlands consortium of dementia cohorts. BMC Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03995-4

Vancouver

Oomens JE, Moonen JEF, Vos SJB, Beran M, Mateus P, De Deyn PP, et al. Identifying pathways to the prevention of dementia: the Netherlands consortium of dementia cohorts. BMC Neurology. 2025. doi:10.1186/s12883-024-03995-4. PMID: 39939930.

BibTeX

@article{oomens2025-39939930,
  author  = {Oomens, Julie Elisabeth and Moonen, Justine E. F. and Vos, Stephanie J. B. and Beran, Magdalena and Mateus, Pedro and De Deyn, Peter Paul and van der Flier, Wiesje M. and Geerlings, Mirjam I. and others},
  title   = {{Identifying pathways to the prevention of dementia: the Netherlands consortium of dementia cohorts}},
  journal = {BMC Neurology},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1186/s12883-024-03995-4},
  pmid    = {39939930},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s12883-024-03995-4}
}

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

Why it matters

This consortium harmonized data across Dutch dementia cohorts and carried out federated analyses, including central analysis of plasma samples for biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease, endothelial dysfunction and inflammation. It shows that this collaborative infrastructure is feasible and promising for future research, but reports no treatment or prevention outcome.

Study details

How this study scored 54/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 1 of 4; Study design 12 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 3 of 4; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multicenter collaboration 3 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. Total 54 of 100.54 of 100 points earned46 not earned

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.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC Neurology)
Journal's citation record 1 / 4 BMC Neurology: journal h-index 122 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 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 1 / 7 Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.7 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 1.3× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 2 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 3 / 4 Last-listed author Pieter Jelle Visser: h-index 90 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 2 / 3 University of California, San Francisco: institution h-index 1,915 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration 3 / 3 OpenAlex lists 24 institution(s) in 4 countries
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39939930)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Total 54 / 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 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.

Related studies in How common it is from nearby years

Also tagged “prevalence”

1,223 studies in the library carry the topic tag “prevalence”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,223 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on How common it is

See all studies in How common it is →