alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Home › Research › How common it is

Understanding the impact of sex and gender in Alzheimer's disease: A call to action

Nebel RA, Aggarwal NT, Barnes LL, Gallagher A, Goldstein JM, Kantarci K, Mallampalli MP, Mormino EC, Scott L, Yu WH, Maki PM, Mielke MM. Alzheimer's & Dementia, 2018-09

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. How common it is

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

This is a review, not a new study: a panel of scientists and clinicians examined the existing evidence on how sex and gender shape Alzheimer's risk, symptoms, and care. They concluded that sex and gender have been largely ignored in Alzheimer's research and precision-medicine approaches, and they laid out 12 priority areas needing further study. It is a widely cited call for the field to take biological sex and social gender more seriously in both research and clinical practice.

Key findings

Why it matters

This review by a panel of scientists and clinicians concluded that sex and gender have been largely ignored in Alzheimer's research and precision-medicine approaches. It is a call for the field to take biological sex and social gender more seriously in research and clinical practice, not a new study result.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Alzheimer's in numbers →

Study details

Limitations

This is a narrative review/perspective article synthesizing existing literature rather than an empirical study presenting new primary data, so it carries no independent effect-size estimate of its own.

How this study scored 39/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 0 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 24 of the 62 points it could be judged on, which is 39 of 100. Total 39 of 100.24 of the 62 points we could judge = 39 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people, randomised / blinded and indexed in PubMed 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, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 39 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & Dementia)
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 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2018 — within 10 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 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
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 0 / 2 No PubMed ID and no DOI — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 24 / 62 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 39 out of 100.
Total 39 / 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.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

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 12 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.

APA 7th

Nebel, R. A., Aggarwal, N. T., Barnes, L. L., Gallagher, A., Goldstein, J. M., Kantarci, K., et al. (2018). Understanding the impact of sex and gender in Alzheimer's disease: A call to action. Alzheimer's & Dementia.

Vancouver

Nebel RA, Aggarwal NT, Barnes LL, Gallagher A, Goldstein JM, Kantarci K, et al. Understanding the impact of sex and gender in Alzheimer's disease: A call to action. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2018.

BibTeX

@article{nebel2018-2d81c8b5,
  author  = {Nebel, R. A. and Aggarwal, N. T. and Barnes, L. L. and Gallagher, A. and Goldstein, J. M. and Kantarci, K. and Mallampalli, M. P. and Mormino, E. C. and Scott, L. and Yu, W. H. and Maki, P. M. and Mielke, M. M.},
  title   = {{Understanding the impact of sex and gender in Alzheimer's disease: A call to action}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& Dementia},
  year    = {2018}
}

Related studies in How common it is

Also in How common it is

80 studies in the library are filed under How common it is with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The How common it is hub.

Similar studies

More on How common it is

See all studies in How common it is →