The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reliability and Validity of NINCDS-ADRDA Criteria for Alzheimer's Disease: The National Institute of Mental Health Genetics Initiative
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess interrater reliability and validity of NINCDS-ADRDA (National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Diseases and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association) criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD). DESIGN: A multisite reliability and validity study in which clinicians from each site diagnosed 60 case summaries yielding a preconsensus estimate of reliability and validity. A consensus conference was conducted for each disagreement, leading to a postconsensus estimate of validity. The criterion standard was a diagnosis of AD by autopsy. SETTING: Three academic medical centers. SUBJECTS: A convenience sample of 60 detailed case summaries, 40 with AD and 20 with other dementing disorders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The kappa coefficient, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: The kappa coefficient for preconsensus agreement on a diagnosis of probable or possible AD vs non-AD was 0.51; the sensitivity of a diagnosis of probable or possible AD for a pathological diagnosis of AD was 0.81, and the specificity was 0.73. The postconsensus sensitivity was 0.83, and the specificity was 0.84. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the reliability and validity of NINCDS-ADRDA criteria and show that the consensus process may improve diagnostic accuracy. The cases are reviewed with a focus on the sources of diagnostic disagreements and errors and possible changes that might improve the accuracy of the criteria.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B., & Paik, M. C. (2003) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471445428 · Cited by 18,646
Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease
Khachaturian, Z. S. (1985) · Archives of Neurology · doi:10.1001/archneur.1985.04060100083029 · Cited by 2,499
Validation of clinical diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease
Morris, J. C., McKeel, D. W., Fulling, K., Torack, R. M., & Berg, L. (1988) · Annals of Neurology · doi:10.1002/ana.410240105 · Cited by 362
Cited by
Knopman, D. S., DeKosky, S. T., Cummings, J. L., Chui, H., Corey–Bloom, J., Relkin, N., Small, G. W., Miller, B., & Stevens, J. C. (2001) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.56.9.1143 · Cited by 1,410
Atrial Fibrillation and Dementia in a Population-Based Study: The Rotterdam Study
Ott, A., Breteler, M. M. B., de Bruyne, M. C., van Harskamp, F., Grobbee, D. E., & Hofman, A. (1997) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.28.2.316 · Cited by 732
FDG-PET improves accuracy in distinguishing frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease
Foster, N. L., Heidebrink, J. L., Clark, C. M., Jagust, W. J., Arnold, S. E., Barbas, N. R., DeCarli, C. S., Scott Turner, R., Koeppe, R. A., Higdon, R., et al. (2007) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awm177 · Cited by 608
Alpha-2 macroglobulin is genetically associated with Alzheimer disease
Blacker, D., Wilcox, M. A., Laird, N. M., Rodes, L., Horvath, S. M., Go, R. C. P., Perry, R., Watson, B., Bassett, S. S., McInnis, M. G., et al. (1998) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/1243 · Cited by 486
Self-citationResults of a high-resolution genome screen of 437 Alzheimer's Disease families
Blacker, D. (2003) · Human Molecular Genetics · doi:10.1093/hmg/ddg007 · Cited by 262
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Blacker, D.
- Venue
- Archives of Neurology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1994-12-01
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1198
- ISSN
- 0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2064085960
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 3.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reliability and Validity of NINCDS-ADRDA Criteria for Alzheimer's Disease: The National Institute of Mental Health Genetics Initiative. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archneur.1994.00540240042014
- The paper
- Blacker, D. (1994). Reliability and Validity of NINCDS-ADRDA Criteria for Alzheimer's Disease: The National Institute of Mental Health Genetics Initiative. Archives of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.1994.00540240042014
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
