Cited by 136Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Incorrect Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease: A Clinicopathologic Study

Klatka, Lisa A.·1996·Archives of Neurology

Abstract

Objectives To examine the accuracy of clinical diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in subjects enrolled in the Rochester Alzheimer's Disease Project (RADP) who were examined at autopsy, and to present a list of clinical "red flags." Design Autopsy examination of both prospective and retrospective subjects consecutively enrolled in this clinicopathologic study of the RADP. Setting University hospital and research center, using a multidisciplinary geriatric neurology clinic, satellite clinics, nursing home visits, and home visits. Patients One hundred seventy subjects clinically diagnosed as having AD who were enrolled in the RADP between 1983 and 1993 underwent neuropathologic examination. Of these, 93 had been enrolled prospectively and 77 retrospectively. Main outcome measures Agreement between clinical and pathologic diagnoses. Results One hundred forty-nine subjects of 170 clinically diagnosed as having AD fulfilled the pathologic criteria for AD, yielding an accuracy rate of 88%. Of 93 subjects enrolled prospectively and diagnosed as having AD, 83 (90%) met the histologic criteria for AD. Of the 77 subjects enrolled retrospectively, neuropathologic examination indicated definite AD in 66 (86%). Conclusions There was a high correlation between clinicians' diagnoses and final pathologic diagnoses. The most common clinical errors involved the misdiagnosis of dementias due to Parkinson's disease and cerebrovascular disease. There was no significant difference in the accurac…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archneur.1996.00550010045015

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 60 · Cited by 136

Authors
Klatka, L. A.
Affiliations
University of Rochester Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Klatka, Lisa A.
Venue
Archives of Neurology
Published
1996-01-01
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
35
ISSN
0003-9942 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2066789321
Cited by
136
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
9.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5t32ag000107-15)
  • National Institute on Aging (P30AG08665, T32AG00107-11, P30AG008665)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
Alzheimer's disease, diagnostic accuracy, misdiagnosis, neuropathologic diagnosis, autopsy findings, Parkinson's disease dementia, vascular dementia, clinical red flags
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Diagnostic Errors, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies

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