Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia, affecting 35 million people today. The search for new treatments is made ever more urgent by prospects for increasing prevalence due to population aging. Mouse models are one of the most important research tools for finding new treatments for AD. Here, we review those models. We begin by briefly reviewing the AD genetics on which mouse models are based and then consider the most common mouse models of AD, including mice transgenic for human amyloid precursor protein (hAPP) and beta-amyloid (Aβ), mice expressing mutant presenilin genes, mice modeling tau's role in AD, and apolipoprotein E models. The discussion highlights key features and important differences between these mouse models. We conclude with a discussion about the role of AD mouse models in the translational pipeline.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hall, A. M., & Roberson, E. D. (2012). Mouse models of Alzheimer's disease. Brain research bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2011.11.017
Vancouver
Hall AM, Roberson ED. Mouse models of Alzheimer's disease. Brain research bulletin. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2011.11.017. PMID: 22142973.
BibTeX
@article{hall2012-22142973,
author = {Hall, A. M. and Roberson, E. D.},
title = {{Mouse models of Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Brain research bulletin},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1016/j.brainresbull.2011.11.017},
pmid = {22142973},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2011.11.017}
}
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
- We conclude with a discussion about the role of AD mouse models in the translational pipeline.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported 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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Brain research bulletin) |
| 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 | 2012 — 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 | Laboratory or animal study (title names “mouse”) — scores zero |
| 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 22142973) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 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 in Genetics
202 studies in the library are filed under Genetics with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Genetics hub.