Home › Research › Prevention and risk
Sex Differences in Alzheimer's Disease
Aggarwal NT, Mielke MM.. Neurologic clinics, 2023-05-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Reviewing the research presented in this article, it is evident that from an epidemiological perspective, it is important to evaluate the extent to which findings of sex and gender differences in Alzheimer's dementia (AD) are due to differences in longevity, survival bias, and comorbidities. Medical, genetic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors, in addition to hormonal factors, can differentially affect the risk and progression of AD in women versus men. Further, evaluation of sex differences in AD progression and the trajectory of change in cognitive function, neuroimaging, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and blood-based biomarkers of AD is needed. Finally, identifying sex differences in AD biomarkers and change across the lifespan is critical for the planning of prevention trials to reduce the risk of developing AD.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Aggarwal, N. T., & Mielke, M. M. (2023). Sex Differences in Alzheimer's Disease. Neurologic clinics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncl.2023.01.001
Vancouver
Aggarwal NT, Mielke MM. Sex Differences in Alzheimer's Disease. Neurologic clinics. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2023.01.001. PMID: 37030962.
BibTeX
@article{aggarwal2023-37030962,
author = {Aggarwal, N. T. and Mielke, M. M.},
title = {{Sex Differences in Alzheimer's Disease}},
journal = {Neurologic clinics},
year = {2023},
doi = {10.1016/j.ncl.2023.01.001},
pmid = {37030962},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ncl.2023.01.001}
}
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
- Medical, genetic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors, in addition to hormonal factors, can differentially affect the risk and progression of AD in women versus men.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed 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 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Neurologic clinics) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | 2023 — within 6 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 | 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 37030962) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 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 Prevention and risk
Also in Prevention and risk
265 studies in the library are filed under Prevention and risk with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Prevention and risk hub.