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.

43/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Brain scans and imaging

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

Plain-language summary

Objective To investigate the extent and the nature of white matter tissue damage of patients with Alzheimer's disease using diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging (DT-MRI). Background Although Alzheimer's disease pathology mainly affects cortical grey matter, previous pathological and MRI studies showed that also the brain white matter of patients is damaged. However, the nature of Alzheimer's disease associated white matter damage is still unclear. Methods Conventional and DT-MRI scans were obtained from 16 patients with Alzheimer's disease and 10 sex and age matched healthy volunteers. The mean diffusivity (D), fractional anisotropy (FA), and inter-voxel coherence (C) of several white matter regions were measured. Results D was higher and FA lower in the corpus callosum, as well as in the white matter of the frontal, temporal, and parietal lobes from patients with Alzheimer's disease than in the corresponding regions from healthy controls. D and FA of the white matter of the occipital lobe and internal capsule were not different between patients and controls. C values were also not different between patients and controls for any of the regions studied. Strong correlations were found between the mini mental state examination score and the average overall white matter D (r=0.92, p<0.001) and FA (r=0.78; p<0.001). Conclusions White matter changes in patients with Alzheimer's disease are likely to be secondary to wallerian degeneration of fibre tracts due to neuronal loss in cortical associative areas.

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

APA 7th

Bozzali, M., Falini, A., Franceschi, M., Cercignani, M., Zuffi, M., Scotti, G., et al. (2002). White matter damage in Alzheimer's disease assessed in vivo using diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.72.6.742

Vancouver

Bozzali M, Falini A, Franceschi M, Cercignani M, Zuffi M, Scotti G, et al. White matter damage in Alzheimer's disease assessed in vivo using diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. 2002. doi:10.1136/jnnp.72.6.742. PMID: 12023417.

BibTeX

@article{bozzali2002-12023417,
  author  = {Bozzali, M. and Falini, A. and Franceschi, M. and Cercignani, M. and Zuffi, M. and Scotti, G. and Comi, G. and Filippi, M.},
  title   = {{White matter damage in Alzheimer's disease assessed in vivo using diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging}},
  journal = {Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry},
  year    = {2002},
  doi     = {10.1136/jnnp.72.6.742},
  pmid    = {12023417},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.72.6.742}
}

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 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.

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 lists 16 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
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

Background Although Alzheimer's disease pathology mainly affects cortical grey matter, previous pathological and MRI studies showed that also the brain white matter of patients is damaged.
Results D was higher and FA lower in the corpus callosum, as well as in the white matter of the frontal, temporal, and parietal lobes from patients with Alzheimer's disease than in the corresponding regions from healthy controls.
Strong correlations were found between the mini mental state examination score and the average overall white matter D (r=0.92, p<0.001) and FA (r=0.78; p<0.001).

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

Study details

Participants16
Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 43/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / 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 multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry)
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	1 / 4	16 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization 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
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 12023417)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	25 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100.
Total	43 / 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.

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

Related studies in Brain scans and imaging from nearby years

Also tagged “diffusion”

172 studies in the library carry the topic tag “diffusion”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 172 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Brain scans and imaging

See all studies in Brain scans and imaging →