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.

38/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Unlabelled Biomarkers of Alzheimer disease (AD) can be imaged in vivo and can be used for diagnostic and prognostic purposes in people with cognitive decline and dementia. Indicators of amyloid deposition such as (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B ((11)C-PiB) PET are primarily used to identify or rule out brain diseases that are associated with amyloid pathology but have also been deployed to forecast the clinical course. Indicators of neuronal metabolism including (18)F-FDG PET demonstrate the localization and severity of neuronal dysfunction and are valuable for differential diagnosis and for predicting the progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia. It is a matter of debate whether to analyze these images visually or using automated techniques. Therefore, we compared the usefulness of both imaging methods and both analyzing strategies to predict dementia due to AD. Methods In MCI participants, a baseline examination, including clinical and imaging assessments, and a clinical follow-up examination after a planned interval of 24 mo were performed. Results Of 28 MCI patients, 9 developed dementia due to AD, 2 developed frontotemporal dementia, and 1 developed moderate dementia of unknown etiology. The positive and negative predictive values and the accuracy of visual and fully automated analyses of (11)C-PiB for the prediction of progression to dementia due to AD were 0.50, 1.00, and 0.68, respectively, for the visual and 0.53, 1.00, and 0.71, respectively, for the automated analyses. Positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of fully automated analyses of (18)F-FDG PET were 0.37, 0.78, and 0.50, respectively. Results of visual analyses were highly variable between raters but were superior to automated analyses. Conclusion Both (18)F-FDG and (11)C-PiB imaging appear to be of limited use for predicting the progression from MCI to dementia due to AD in short-term follow-up, irrespective of the strategy of analysis. On the other hand, amyloid PET is extremely useful to rule out underlying AD. The findings of the present study favor a fully automated method of analysis for (11)C-PiB assessments and a visual analysis by experts for (18)F-FDG assessments.

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

APA 7th

Grimmer, T., Wutz, C., Alexopoulos, P., Drzezga, A., Förster, S., Förstl, H., et al. (2016). Visual Versus Fully Automated Analyses of 18F-FDG and Amyloid PET for Prediction of Dementia Due to Alzheimer Disease in Mild Cognitive Impairment. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.163717

Vancouver

Grimmer T, Wutz C, Alexopoulos P, Drzezga A, Förster S, Förstl H, et al. Visual Versus Fully Automated Analyses of 18F-FDG and Amyloid PET for Prediction of Dementia Due to Alzheimer Disease in Mild Cognitive Impairment. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. 2016. doi:10.2967/jnumed.115.163717. PMID: 26585056.

BibTeX

@article{grimmer2016-26585056,
  author  = {Grimmer, T. and Wutz, C. and Alexopoulos, P. and Drzezga, A. and Förster, S. and Förstl, H. and Goldhardt, O. and Ortner, M. and others},
  title   = {{Visual Versus Fully Automated Analyses of 18F-FDG and Amyloid PET for Prediction of Dementia Due to Alzheimer Disease in Mild Cognitive Impairment}},
  journal = {Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.2967/jnumed.115.163717},
  pmid    = {26585056},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.115.163717}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: our record does not state a study design, so check the methods section of the original before weighing the result.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded low. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Low means the abstract matched neither pattern. It is the default label, and it does not mean the work is poor; many sound lab and imaging papers land here. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Indicators of amyloid deposition such as (11)C-Pittsburgh compound B ((11)C-PiB) PET are primarily used to identify or rule out brain diseases that are associated with amyloid pathology but have also been deployed to forecast the clinical course.
Results Of 28 MCI patients, 9 developed dementia due to AD, 2 developed frontotemporal dementia, and 1 developed moderate dementia of unknown etiology.
Results of visual analyses were highly variable between raters but were superior to automated analyses.

Why it matters

In a small group of 28 people with mild cognitive impairment, visual reading of amyloid PET scans varied a lot between raters but predicted progression to Alzheimer's dementia better than fully automated analysis. This is a small imaging comparison about prediction, not about treating, curing or preventing the disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 38/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	Journal of Nuclear Medicine: journal h-index 230 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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	2016 — within 20 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)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	4 / 7	Cited 57 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	2 / 5	4.8 citations a year over 12 year(s) since 2016
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 5.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	1 / 6	Cited by 2 other studies in this library
Still being cited	1 / 4	Cited 10 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Alexander Kurz: h-index 38 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	Technical University of Munich: institution h-index 1,092 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 26585056)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	38 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — Unpaywall lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Later studies that cite this one

2 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Biomarkers from nearby years

Also tagged “machine”

834 studies in the library carry the topic tag “machine”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 834 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →