Prevalence of apolipoprotein E4 genotype and homozygotes (APOE e4/4) among patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Ward A, Crean S, Mercaldi CJ, Collins JM, Boyd D, Cook MN, Arrighi HM.. Neuroepidemiology, 2011-12-17
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Background Population allele frequencies of apolipoprotein E (APOE) vary by geographic region. The purpose of this study is to summarize and evaluate published estimates for the prevalence of APOE e4 carrier status among the population diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease (AD) by geographic region and country. Methods A systematic review of English-language publications from January 1, 1985, through May 31, 2010, was conducted. Studies reporting APOE e4 status for patients diagnosed with AD were included in the analysis; trials and autopsies were excluded. APOE e4 data were pooled, and prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results Pooled estimates for APOE e4 carrier prevalence data were derived from 142 independent samples: 48.7% (95% CI: 46.5-51.0), and from 73 samples for e4/4 (homozygotes): 9.6% (95% CI: 8.4-10.8). The highest estimates were in Northern Europe: 61.3% (95% CI: 55.9-66.7), e4/4 prevalence: 14.1% (95% CI: 12.2-16.0). The lowest estimates were in Asia and Southern Europe. Substantial heterogeneity of these prevalence estimates was observed. Conclusions APOE e4 genotype prevalence varies among AD patients by region and within each country. Further exploration is warranted to better understand the substantial heterogeneity of these prevalence estimates.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Ward, A., Crean, S., Mercaldi, C. J., Collins, J. M., Boyd, D., Cook, M. N., et al. (2012). Prevalence of apolipoprotein E4 genotype and homozygotes (APOE e4/4) among patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroepidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1159/000334607
Vancouver
Ward A, Crean S, Mercaldi CJ, Collins JM, Boyd D, Cook MN, et al. Prevalence of apolipoprotein E4 genotype and homozygotes (APOE e4/4) among patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuroepidemiology. 2012. doi:10.1159/000334607. PMID: 22179327.
BibTeX
@article{ward2012-22179327,
author = {Ward, A. and Crean, S. and Mercaldi, C. J. and Collins, J. M. and Boyd, D. and Cook, M. N. and Arrighi, H. M.},
title = {{Prevalence of apolipoprotein E4 genotype and homozygotes (APOE e4/4) among patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis}},
journal = {Neuroepidemiology},
year = {2012},
doi = {10.1159/000334607},
pmid = {22179327},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1159/000334607}
}
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 7 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
- Results Pooled estimates for APOE e4 carrier prevalence data were derived from 142 independent samples: 48.7% (95% CI: 46.5-51.0), and from 73 samples for e4/4 (homozygotes): 9.6% (95% CI: 8.4-10.8).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Study designsystematic review
- Effect size48.7%; 9.6%; 61.3%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 67/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size and studied in people 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 67 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neuroepidemiology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A systematic review of all the studies on the question |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” 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 | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| 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 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| 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 |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22179327) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 39 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 67 out of 100. |
| Total | 67 / 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 the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Genetics
Also tagged “diagnosed”
3 studies in the library carry the topic tag “diagnosed”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 3 tagged studies.