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.

43/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Prevention and risk

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia, accounting for 60-70% of all cases [Hebert et al., 2003, 1]. The need for effective therapies for AD is great. Current approaches, including cholinesterase inhibitors and N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists, are symptomatic treatments for AD but do not prevent disease progression. Many diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to AD are currently changing due to the knowledge that underlying pathology starts 10 to 20 years before clinical signs of dementia appear [Holtzman et al., 2011, 2]. New therapies which focus on prevention or delay of the onset or cognitive symptoms are needed. Recent advances in the identification of AD biomarkers now make it possible to detect AD pathology in the preclinical stage of the disease, in cognitively normal (CN) individuals; this biomarker data should be used in the selection of high-risk populations for clinical trials. In vivo visualization of AD neuropathology and biological, biochemical or physiological confirmation of the effects of treatment likely will substantially improve development of novel pharmaceuticals. Positron emission tomography (PET) is the leading neuroimaging tool to detect and provide quantitative measures of AD amyloid pathology in vivo at the early stages and follow its course longitudinally. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Imaging Brain Aging and Neurodegenerative disease.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Low

This is a narrative review. This paper explains that amyloid pathology begins 10 to 20 years before dementia symptoms and that PET imaging can detect it in cognitively normal people, which could help select high-risk participants for trials. It is about using imaging as a research and detection tool, not about a treatment that prevents or cures Alzheimer's disease.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

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

APA 7th

Vlassenko, A. G., Benzinger, T. L., & Morris, J. C. (2012). PET amyloid-beta imaging in preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Biochimica et biophysica acta. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.11.005

Vancouver

Vlassenko AG, Benzinger TL, Morris JC. PET amyloid-beta imaging in preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Biochimica et biophysica acta. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.11.005. PMID: 22108203.

BibTeX

@article{vlassenko2012-22108203,
  author  = {Vlassenko, A. G. and Benzinger, T. L. and Morris, J. C.},
  title   = {{PET amyloid-beta imaging in preclinical Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Biochimica et biophysica acta},
  year    = {2012},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.11.005},
  pmid    = {22108203},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.11.005}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a narrative review. It summarises a field without a fixed search method, so it shows how authors read the evidence rather than measuring it. Use it to find the primary studies, not as a result in itself.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

New therapies which focus on prevention or delay of the onset or cognitive symptoms are needed.
Recent advances in the identification of AD biomarkers now make it possible to detect AD pathology in the preclinical stage of the disease, in cognitively normal (CN) individuals; this biomarker data should be used in the selection of high-risk populations for clinical trials.
In vivo visualization of AD neuropathology and biological, biochemical or physiological confirmation of the effects of treatment likely will substantially improve development of novel pharmaceuticals.
Positron emission tomography (PET) is the leading neuroimaging tool to detect and provide quantitative measures of AD amyloid pathology in vivo at the early stages and follow its course longitudinally.
This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Imaging Brain Aging and Neurodegenerative disease.

Why it matters

This paper explains that amyloid pathology begins 10 to 20 years before dementia symptoms and that PET imaging can detect it in cognitively normal people, which could help select high-risk participants for trials. It is about using imaging as a research and detection tool, not about a treatment that prevents or cures Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 43/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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, so that was left out: it earned 41 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Biochimica et biophysica acta)
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	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	5 / 7	Cited 175 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	3 / 5	10.9 citations a year over 16 year(s) since 2012
Impact for its field and year	2 / 6	Cited 2.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 8 other studies in this library
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 32 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	4 / 4	Last-listed author John C. Morris: h-index 209 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	2 / 3	Washington University in St. Louis: institution h-index 1,962 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	0 / 3	OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete)
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22108203)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	41 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total	43 / 100	—

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

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 56.

Later studies that cite this one

8 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Prevention and risk from nearby years

Also tagged “machine”

834 studies in the library carry the topic tag “machine”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 834 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Prevention and risk

See all studies in Prevention and risk →