Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35493941›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022

Prediction Models for Conversion From Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Yanru Chen, Xiaoling Qian, Yuanyuan Zhang, Wenli Su, Yanan Huang, Xinyu Wang, Xiaoli Chen, Enhan Zhao, Lin Han, Yuxia Ma

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Mild cognitive impairment-to-Alzheimer's dementia progression risk: the contribution of the Interceptor project.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yanru ChenEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Xiaoling QianDepartment of Neurology, Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yuanyuan ZhangEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Wenli SuEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yanan HuangEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Xinyu WangEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Xiaoli ChenEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Enhan ZhaoEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Lin HanEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yuxia MaEvidence-Based Nursing, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Lanzhou University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a devastating neurodegenerative disorder with no cure, and available treatments are only able to postpone the progression of the disease. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is considered to be a transitional stage preceding AD. Therefore, prediction models for conversion from MCI to AD are desperately required. These will allow early treatment of patients with MCI before they develop AD. This study performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the reported risk prediction models and identify the most prevalent factors for conversion from MCI to AD. Methods: We systematically reviewed the studies from the databases of PubMed, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library, which were searched through September 2021. Two reviewers independently identified eligible articles and extracted the data. We used the Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modeling Studies (CHARMS) checklist for the risk of bias assessment. Results: In total, 18 articles describing the prediction models for conversion from MCI to AD were identified. The dementia conversion rate of elderly patients with MCI ranged from 14.49 to 87%. Models in 12 studies were developed using the data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). C-index/area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of development models were 0.67-0.98, and the validation models were 0.62-0.96. MRI, apolipoprotein E genotype 4 (APOE4), older age, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, and Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive (ADAS-cog) score were the most common and strongest predictors included in the models. Conclusion: In this systematic review, many prediction models have been developed and have good predictive performance, but the lack of external validation of models limited the extensive application in the general population. In clinical practice, it is recommended that medical professionals adopt a comprehensive forecasting method rather than a single predictive factor to screen patients with a high risk of MCI. Future research should pay attention to the improvement, calibration, and validation of existing models while considering new variables, new methods, and differences in risk profiles across populations.

Indexed as

Alzheimer’s diseasedementiamild cognitive impairmentprediction modelssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35493941
PMCPMC9049273
OpenAlexW4226078642

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.