Home › Research › Long-term cohort studies
The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) Database: an Alzheimer disease database
Beekly DL, Ramos EM, van Belle G, Deitrich W, Clark AD, Jacka ME, Kukull WA, NIA-Alzheimer's Disease Centers.. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders, 2004-10-01
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) is responsible for developing and maintaining a database of patient information collected from the 29 Alzheimer disease centers (ADCs) funded by the National Institute on Aging. Each of the centers collects center-determined data elements on patients enrolled into its center and transmits a minimum dataset to NACC. Data are managed differently at each center depending on that center's research needs. The centers' data systems vary from a single personal computer running spreadsheet software to a network of servers running an advanced data management system such as Oracle. The challenge for NACC is to expand and adjust previously collected data elements into an integrated database that could be used for administrative as well as research purposes. In addition, NACC sought to allow the centers to have the flexibility they needed for data submission. To accomplish this task, NACC designed a database that contained separate specific datasets each with individual data elements. NACC also designed a data management system to easily collect and manage these data. The NACC web site (www.alz.washington.edu) was created to allow access to the data.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Beekly, D. L., Ramos, E. M., van Belle, G., Deitrich, W., Clark, A. D., Jacka, M. E., et al. (2004). The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) Database: an Alzheimer disease database. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders.
Vancouver
Beekly DL, Ramos EM, van Belle G, Deitrich W, Clark AD, Jacka ME, et al. The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) Database: an Alzheimer disease database. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders. 2004. PMID: 15592144.
BibTeX
@article{beekly2004-15592144,
author = {Beekly, D. L. and Ramos, E. M. and van Belle, G. and Deitrich, W. and Clark, A. D. and Jacka, M. E. and Kukull, W. A. and Centers, NIA-Alzheimer's Disease},
title = {{The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) Database: an Alzheimer disease database}},
journal = {Alzheimer disease and associated disorders},
year = {2004},
pmid = {15592144}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. This record has no DOI, so the citation leaves it out. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 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
- The challenge for NACC is to expand and adjust previously collected data elements into an integrated database that could be used for administrative as well as research purposes.
- In addition, NACC sought to allow the centers to have the flexibility they needed for data submission.
- To accomplish this task, NACC designed a database that contained separate specific datasets each with individual data elements.
- NACC also designed a data management system to easily collect and manage these data.
- The NACC web site (www.alz.washington.edu) was created to allow access to the data.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer disease and associated disorders) |
| 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 | 2004 — 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 15592144) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 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 Long-term cohort studies
Also tagged “costs”
265 studies in the library carry the topic tag “costs”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 265 tagged studies.