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 49 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Normative developmental equations provide reliable descriptors of brain electrical activity in people 6 to 90 years old. Healthy persons display only chance deviations beyond predicted ranges. Patients with neurological impairment, subtle cognitive dysfunctions, or psychiatric disorders (including dementia and primary depression) show a high incidence of abnormal values. The magnitude of the deviations increases with clinical severity. Different disorders are characterized by distinctive profiles of abnormal values of brain electrical features. Computerized differential classification of some of these disorders can be achieved with high accuracy. Such classification, providing objective corroboration of brain dysfunctions, may be a useful adjunct to psychiatric diagnosis, which relies primarily on subjective clinical impressions. These methods may provide independent criteria for diagnostic validity, evaluations of treatment efficacy, and more individualized therapy.

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

APA 7th

John, E. R., Prichep, L. S., Fridman, J., & Easton, P. (1988). Neurometrics: computer-assisted differential diagnosis of brain dysfunctions. Science (New York, N.Y.). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3336779

Vancouver

John ER, Prichep LS, Fridman J, Easton P. Neurometrics: computer-assisted differential diagnosis of brain dysfunctions. Science (New York, N.Y.). 1988. doi:10.1126/science.3336779. PMID: 3336779.

BibTeX

@article{john1988-3336779,
  author  = {John, E. R. and Prichep, L. S. and Fridman, J. and Easton, P.},
  title   = {{Neurometrics: computer-assisted differential diagnosis of brain dysfunctions}},
  journal = {Science (New York, N.Y.)},
  year    = {1988},
  doi     = {10.1126/science.3336779},
  pmid    = {3336779},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3336779}
}

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

Why it matters

This paper describes computer-assisted analysis of brain electrical activity that can classify some brain dysfunctions, including dementia, with high accuracy. It presents the method as a possible aid to diagnosis, not as a treatment, cure, or prevention.

Study details

How this study scored 49/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 10 of 10; Journal's citation record 4 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 6 of 7; Citations per year 3 of 5; Impact for its field and year 4 of 6; Cited by studies here 1 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 47 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 49 of 100. Total 49 of 100.47 of the 96 points we could judge = 49 of 100

Published in a top-tier journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 47 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 49 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 10 / 10 Tier 1 — top-tier general journal (Science (New York, N.Y.))
Journal's citation record 4 / 4 Science: journal h-index 1,754 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 1988 — older than 20 years, still counted
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)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 6 / 7 Cited 553 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 3 / 5 13.8 citations a year over 40 year(s) since 1988
Impact for its field and year 4 / 6 Cited 14.6× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 1 / 6 Cited by 1 other studies in this library
Still being cited 2 / 4 Cited 18 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record 2 / 3 New York University: institution h-index 1,612 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 3336779)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 47 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 47 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 49 out of 100.
Total 49 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

May need a subscription OpenAlex found no free copy of the full text (checked 6 Feb 1020), so the publisher may charge for it. The PubMed abstract is free.

Later studies that cite this one

1 study in the alzhub library lists this one in its references.

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis

Also tagged “bodies”

1,017 studies in the library carry the topic tag “bodies”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,017 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →