Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
The United States CADASIL Consortium: Baseline Findings from a Natural History Study
Paulsen, J. S.; Bockholt, H. J.; Adams, W. H.; Burks, D. K.; Majersik, J. J.; Salloway, S. P.; Lee, S.; Fornage et al.. medRxiv (preprint), 2026-09-22
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Compared with controls, adjusted odds of classification into a more impaired CDR category were higher in all tiers (OR 2.55-5.08, 95% CI 1.22-11.34).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Paulsen, J. S., Bockholt, H. J., Adams, W. H., Burks, D. K., Majersik, J. J., Salloway, S. P., et al. (2026). The United States CADASIL Consortium: Baseline Findings from a Natural History Study. medRxiv (preprint). https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.20.26363512
Vancouver
Paulsen JS, Bockholt HJ, Adams WH, Burks DK, Majersik JJ, Salloway SP, et al. The United States CADASIL Consortium: Baseline Findings from a Natural History Study. medRxiv (preprint). 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.09.20.26363512.
BibTeX
@article{paulsen2026-a2e5db82,
author = {Paulsen, J. S. and Bockholt, H. J. and Adams, W. H. and Burks, D. K. and Majersik, J. J. and Salloway, S. P. and Lee, S. and Fornage and others},
title = {{The United States CADASIL Consortium: Baseline Findings from a Natural History Study}},
journal = {medRxiv (preprint)},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.20.26363512},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.09.20.26363512}
}
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
- Compared with controls, adjusted odds of classification into a more impaired CDR category were higher in all tiers (OR 2.55-5.08, 95% CI 1.22-11.34).
Why it matters
This natural history study of CADASIL, a rare inherited cause of stroke and dementia, found that participants had higher odds of being classified into more impaired categories than controls. It describes the course of the disease and does not test any treatment or cure.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Participants343
- Effect size62.5%; 91.4%; 7.0%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 41 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on impact for its field and year and senior author's track record, so those were left out: it earned 37 of the 90 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv (preprint)) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 343 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| 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 | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author the United States CADASIL Consortiusm holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | University of Washington: institution h-index 3,540 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 3 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 15 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 37 / 90 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 90 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
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).
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also in Brain scans and imaging
114 studies in the library are filed under Brain scans and imaging with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Brain scans and imaging hub.