Home › Research › Getting a diagnosis
Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia
Rascovsky K, Hodges JR, Knopman D, Mendez MF, Kramer JH, Neuhaus J, van Swieten JC, Seelaar H et al.. Brain : a journal of neurology, 2011-08-02
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. In conclusion, the revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Rascovsky, K., Hodges, JR., Knopman, D., Mendez, M. F., Kramer, J. H., Neuhaus, J., et al. (2011). Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia. Brain : a journal of neurology. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awr179
Vancouver
Rascovsky K, Hodges JR, Knopman D, Mendez MF, Kramer JH, Neuhaus J, et al. Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia. Brain : a journal of neurology. 2011. doi:10.1093/brain/awr179. PMID: 21810890.
BibTeX
@article{rascovsky2011-21810890,
author = {Rascovsky, K. and Hodges, JR. and Knopman, D. and Mendez, M. F. and Kramer, J. H. and Neuhaus, J. and van Swieten, J. C. and Seelaar, H. and others},
title = {{Sensitivity of revised diagnostic criteria for the behavioural variant of frontotemporal dementia}},
journal = {Brain : a journal of neurology},
year = {2011},
doi = {10.1093/brain/awr179},
pmid = {21810890},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awr179}
}
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's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment.
- In conclusion, the revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improve diagnostic accuracy compared with previously established criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration.
Why it matters
This study found that revised criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia improved diagnostic accuracy compared with older criteria in a sample with known frontotemporal lobar degeneration. It concerns diagnosis of a different dementia type and does not report a treatment or cure.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Getting a diagnosis →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 65/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Brain : a journal of neurology) |
| Journal's citation record | 4 / 4 | Brain: journal h-index 503 (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 | 2011 — 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) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 7 / 7 | Cited 5,242 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 5 / 5 | 308.4 citations a year over 17 year(s) since 2011 |
| Impact for its field and year | 6 / 6 | Cited 110.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 6 / 6 | Cited by 279 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 4 / 4 | Cited 1,254 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 4 / 4 | Last-listed author Bruce L. Miller: h-index 198 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 3 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 28 institution(s) in 9 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21810890) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 65 / 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 this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 42.
Later studies that cite this one
279 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
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.