alzhub.org
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.

Home › Research › Costs and economics

Mapping U.S. POINTER Cognitive-Slope Gains Onto Predicted Clinical Progression: An External-Cohort Translation Analysis With Exploratory Economic Thresholds

Nakashima S, Sato K, Niimi Y, Satake W, Iwatsubo T, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative.. medRxiv, 2026-05-20

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.

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Costs and economics

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

POINTER reported a modest structured-versus-self-guided difference in the annual rate of global cognitive change. We evaluated a counterfactual +0.029 SD/year improvement in cohort-specific mPACC slope, corresponding to the structured-versus-self-guided cognitive-slope difference reported in U.S. Results Landmark analyses yielded small translated effects. POINTER–referenced structured-versus-self-guided cognitive-slope increment translated into directionally consistent reductions in predicted progression risk across ADNI, A4, and LEARN. Exploratory economic-threshold results suggested more favorable margins in higher-risk ADNI subgroups under low incremental-cost and high willingness-to-pay assumptions, but these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating translation estimates rather than empirical cost-effectiveness evidence.

Key findings

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Costs & economics →

Study details

How this study scored 16/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 2 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 4 of 10; How recent 5 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 3 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 32 of the 62 points it could be judged on, which is 52 of 100. Raw total 52 of 100, shown as 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed research article.raw total 52 of 100capped at 16 — hatched points do not count

Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 52 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on 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 32 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 2 / 10 Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count
Study design 7 / 12 A longitudinal study following the same people over time
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 4 / 10 Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server.
How recent 5 / 5 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 399 participants
Effect reported 3 / 3 Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
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 — / 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 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 32 / 62 Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100.
Total 52 / 100 Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article.

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.

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

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.

APA 7th

Nakashima, S., Sato, K., Niimi, Y., Satake, W., Iwatsubo, T., & Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. (2026). Mapping U.S. POINTER Cognitive-Slope Gains Onto Predicted Clinical Progression: An External-Cohort Translation Analysis With Exploratory Economic Thresholds. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.05.17.26353395

Vancouver

Nakashima S, Sato K, Niimi Y, Satake W, Iwatsubo T, Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Mapping U.S. POINTER Cognitive-Slope Gains Onto Predicted Clinical Progression: An External-Cohort Translation Analysis With Exploratory Economic Thresholds. medRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.05.17.26353395.

BibTeX

@article{nakashima2026-95afaa90,
  author  = {Nakashima, S. and Sato, K. and Niimi, Y. and Satake, W. and Iwatsubo, T. and {Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
  title   = {{Mapping U.S. POINTER Cognitive-Slope Gains Onto Predicted Clinical Progression: An External-Cohort Translation Analysis With Exploratory Economic Thresholds}},
  journal = {medRxiv},
  year    = {2026},
  doi     = {10.64898/2026.05.17.26353395},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.05.17.26353395}
}

Related studies in Costs and economics

Also tagged “costs”

265 studies in the library carry the topic tag “costs”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 265 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Costs and economics

See all studies in Costs and economics →