Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Individual estimates of age at detectable amyloid onset for risk factor assessment
Bilgel M, An Y, Zhou Y, Wong DF, Prince JL, Ferrucci L, Resnick SM.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2015-11-14
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Introduction Individualized estimates of age at detectable amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation, distinct from amyloid positivity, allow for analysis of onset age of Aβ accumulation as an outcome measure to understand risk factors. Methods Using longitudinal Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) positron emission tomography data from Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging, we estimated the age at which each PiB+ individual began accumulating Aβ. We used survival analysis methods to quantify risk of accumulating Aβ and differences in onset age of Aβ accumulation in relation to APOE ε4 status and sex among 36 APOE ε4 carriers and 83 noncarriers. Results Age at onset of Aβ accumulation for the APOE ε4- and ε4+ groups was 73.1 and 60.7, respectively. APOE ε4 positivity conferred a threefold risk of accumulating Aβ after adjusting for sex and education. Discussion Estimation of onset age of amyloid accumulation may help gauge treatment efficacy in interventions to delay symptom onset in Alzheimer's disease.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Bilgel, M., An, Y., Zhou, Y., Wong, D. F., Prince, J. L., Ferrucci, L., et al. (2016). Individual estimates of age at detectable amyloid onset for risk factor assessment. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2015.08.166
Vancouver
Bilgel M, An Y, Zhou Y, Wong DF, Prince JL, Ferrucci L, et al. Individual estimates of age at detectable amyloid onset for risk factor assessment. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2016. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2015.08.166. PMID: 26588863.
BibTeX
@article{bilgel2016-26588863,
author = {Bilgel, M. and An, Y. and Zhou, Y. and Wong, D. F. and Prince, J. L. and Ferrucci, L. and Resnick, S. M.},
title = {{Individual estimates of age at detectable amyloid onset for risk factor assessment}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1016/j.jalz.2015.08.166},
pmid = {26588863},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2015.08.166}
}
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results Age at onset of Aβ accumulation for the APOE ε4- and ε4+ groups was 73.1 and 60.7, respectively.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 55 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 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 | No randomization 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26588863) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 32 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 55 out of 100. |
| Total | 55 / 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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “factor”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “factor”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.