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. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

There is both clinical and neuroanatomical variability at the single-subject level in Alzheimer's disease, complicating our understanding of brain-behaviour relationships and making it challenging to develop neuroimaging biomarkers to track disease severity, progression, and response to treatment. Prior work has shown that both group-level atrophy in clinical dementia syndromes and complex neurological symptoms in patients with focal brain lesions localize to brain networks. Here, we use a new technique termed 'atrophy network mapping' to test the hypothesis that single-subject atrophy maps in patients with a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease will also localize to syndrome-specific and symptom-specific brain networks. First, we defined single-subject atrophy maps by comparing cortical thickness in each Alzheimer's disease patient versus a group of age-matched, cognitively normal subjects across two independent datasets (total Alzheimer's disease patients = 330). No more than 42% of Alzheimer's disease patients had atrophy at any given location across these datasets. Next, we determined the network of brain regions functionally connected to each Alzheimer's disease patient's location of atrophy using seed-based functional connectivity in a large (n = 1000) normative connectome. Despite the heterogeneity of atrophied regions at the single-subject level, we found that 100% of patients with a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease had atrophy functionally connected to the same brain regions in the mesial temporal lobe, precuneus cortex, and angular gyrus. Results were specific versus control subjects and replicated across two independent datasets. Finally, we used atrophy network mapping to define symptom-specific networks for impaired memory and delusions, finding that our results matched symptom networks derived from patients with focal brain lesions. Our study supports atrophy network mapping as a method to localize clinical, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric symptoms to brain networks, providing insight into brain-behaviour relationships in patients with dementia.

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

APA 7th

Tetreault, A. M., Phan, T., Orlando, D., Lyu, I., Kang, H., Landman, B., et al. (2020). Network localization of clinical, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease. Brain : a journal of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awaa058

Vancouver

Tetreault AM, Phan T, Orlando D, Lyu I, Kang H, Landman B, et al. Network localization of clinical, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease. Brain : a journal of neurology. 2020. doi:10.1093/brain/awaa058. PMID: 32176777.

BibTeX

@article{tetreault2020-32176777,
  author  = {Tetreault, Aaron M and Phan, Tony and Orlando, Dana and Lyu, Ilwoo and Kang, Hakmook and Landman, Bennett and Darby, R Ryan and {Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative}},
  title   = {{Network localization of clinical, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Brain : a journal of neurology},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.1093/brain/awaa058},
  pmid    = {32176777},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awaa058}
}

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 8 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

Study details

How this study scored 54/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 0 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 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 30 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 54 of 100. Total 54 of 100.30 of the 56 points we could judge = 54 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 54 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Brain : a journal of neurology)
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 2 / 5 2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,000 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 32176777)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 30 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 54 out of 100.
Total 54 / 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.

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 “networks”

187 studies in the library carry the topic tag “networks”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 187 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →