Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41656391›Full record

ArticleGeroScience2026

The many meanings of Alzheimer's disease and why they matter for policy, research, and care.

Roderick A Corriveau

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GeroScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Roderick A CorriveauDepartment of Neurology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, USA. rcorriveau@circlebiopharma.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6954-9240

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a national priority with far-reaching implications for patients, families, clinicians, researchers, and policymakers. Yet the term AD refers to multiple distinct meanings that are often overlooked or ambiguously applied, risking misaligned research and policy priorities that affect patient outcomes. Recent FDA approvals of passive immunotherapies and related biomarker developments show that differing interpretations of AD complicate research, regulatory decisions, payer coverage, and clinical use. In contrast to efforts aimed at revising AD nomenclature, this paper clarifies five key meanings of AD as currently used. It provides a practical framework to indicate how the term AD is applied in different ways within and across clinical, research, regulatory, and policy contexts. Each key meaning-clinical (symptom-focused), genetically determined (mutation-driven), pathological (autopsy-confirmed), plaque-defined (amyloid-beta-plaque-positive), and broad (can encompass multiple dementia types)-may apply alone or in combination depending on context. These distinctions also raise ethical considerations, particularly for biomarker-based diagnoses and their impact on patient communication and decision-making. Using this framework helps decision-makers identify the intended AD meaning and align research, policy, and care for better patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseBiomedical ResearchHealth PolicyBiomarkersHumansTerminology as TopicUnited StatesBiomarkersAlzheimer's diseaseBiomarkersDementiaGeneticsHealth PolicyPathology

Identifiers

PMID41656391
PMCPMC13356252

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.