ReviewPCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2024
A systematic review of cognitive and behavioral tools to differentiate behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia from other conditions.
Review in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differentiating Behavioural Presentations of Biomarker-Confirmed Alzheimer's Disease from Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Using the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-III.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders · 2026Article
- Reference-Group Adjusted Behavioural Dysfunction Questionnaire Score Discriminates Highly Behavioural-Variant Frontotemporal Dementia From Major Depressive Disorder and Alzheimer's Disease Dementia.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Factors associated with true-positive and false-positive diagnoses of behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia in 100 consecutive referrals from specialist physicians.European journal of neurology · 2025Article
- A systematic review of cognitive and behavioral tools to differentiate behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia from other conditions.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2024Review
- Clinical tools to differentiate behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia from phenocopies.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Article
- Exploring neuropsychiatric and behavioral symptoms, and social cognitive deficits in the differential diagnosis of behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia and primary psychiatric disorders: A systematic literature review.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is thought to be the commonest clinical presentation of frontotemporal lobar degeneration and is predominantly characterized by changes in behavior. In patients lacking unequivocal biomarker evidence of frontotemporal neurodegeneration, the clinical diagnosis of bvFTD is often unstable. In response, we conducted a systematic review and critical appraisal of cognitive and behavioral tools that have sought to differentiate bvFTD from other conditions. A systematic literature review of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted on December 31, 2023 for cognitive and behavioral tools that differentiated bvFTD from other cohorts. Ninety-six studies were included. The quality appraisal of almost all studies was low and introduced a high risk of bias. The few studies that were of high quality had a prospective study design and recruited patients suspected (but not yet confirmed) to have bvFTD. These studies reported that behavioral tools (e.g., the Frontal Behavioral Inventory) and social cognition tests (e.g., the Ekman's Faces Test) had good test performance in differentiating bvFTD from a broad range of psychiatric and neurological conditions. Importantly, the review highlighted the extreme paucity of studies that have evaluated methods where, in Bayesian terms, there is genuine clinical uncertainty regarding a diagnosis of bvFTD. Most studies used healthy controls of typical Alzheimer's disease as comparators-groups that often have negligible pretest probability of bvFTD. In response, we propose a study design checklist for studies seeking to develop diagnostic algorithms in bvFTD research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.