Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Structural magnetic resonance imaging in the practical assessment of dementia: beyond exclusion
Scheltens P, Fox N, Barkhof F, De Carli C.. The Lancet. Neurology, 2002-05-01
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Neuroimaging is increasingly used to aid diagnosis in dementia. The traditional view that imaging is important solely as means of excluding treatable causes of dementia is maintained by many guidelines. These conditions however, account for a tiny proportion (<1%) of all causes of dementia. Over the past few years it has been recognised that a more accurate diagnosis and prognosis is important for patients and their families. The different pathological processes that produce cerebral dysfunction at a cellular level also produce macroscopic effects that can be detected in vivo with imaging. Clinically useful measures that distinguish between neurodegenerative disorders at an early stage are still awaited. The most likely future use of structural imaging will be the identification of patients at risk for Alzheimer's disease or with preclinical Alzheimer's disease. For magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) this will mean focusing on those areas that are affected earliest in the disease; ie, entorhinal cortex and hippocampus, using high resolution structural MRI or sophisticated brain mapping techniques. Imaging research is also likely to focus on measuring progression and detecting therapeutic effect. As such, MRI is already become an indispensable tool in clinical trials in dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Scheltens, P., Fox, N., Barkhof, F., & De Carli, C. (2002). Structural magnetic resonance imaging in the practical assessment of dementia: beyond exclusion. The Lancet. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(02)00002-9
Vancouver
Scheltens P, Fox N, Barkhof F, De Carli C. Structural magnetic resonance imaging in the practical assessment of dementia: beyond exclusion. The Lancet. Neurology. 2002. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(02)00002-9. PMID: 12849541.
BibTeX
@article{scheltens2002-12849541,
author = {Scheltens, P. and Fox, N. and Barkhof, F. and De Carli, C.},
title = {{Structural magnetic resonance imaging in the practical assessment of dementia: beyond exclusion}},
journal = {The Lancet. Neurology},
year = {2002},
doi = {10.1016/s1474-4422(02)00002-9},
pmid = {12849541},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(02)00002-9}
}
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
- Clinically useful measures that distinguish between neurodegenerative disorders at an early stage are still awaited.
- The most likely future use of structural imaging will be the identification of patients at risk for Alzheimer's disease or with preclinical Alzheimer's disease.
- For magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) this will mean focusing on those areas that are affected earliest in the disease; ie, entorhinal cortex and hippocampus, using high resolution structural MRI or sophisticated brain mapping techniques.
- Imaging research is also likely to focus on measuring progression and detecting therapeutic effect.
- As such, MRI is already become an indispensable tool in clinical trials in dementia.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
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. 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 | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet. Neurology) |
| 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 | 2002 — 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 | — / 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 12849541) |
| 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 Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “exclusion”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “exclusion”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.