Cited by 317Alzheimer's disease research and treatmentsDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNeuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 29 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Hippocampal neurons in pre-clinical Alzheimer's disease.

Open access

Abstract

In a previous study of hippocampal neurons in aging and AD [Lancet 344 (1994) 769], we demonstrated that the loss of neurons in the CA1 region was disease-specific and not related to aging. In the present study, we examined for loss of hippocampal neurons in preclinical AD, a period during which there are abundant amyloid deposits in the brain but no evidence of cognitive decline. We examined the postmortem brains of 33 subjects from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging and the Johns Hopkins Alzheimer's Disease Research Center. Using unbiased stereology, we estimated the total number of neurons in the granule cell layer, hilus, CA3-2, CA1, and subiculum of AD (n = 14) preclinical AD (n = 8), and age-matched control subjects (n = 11). The results from the present study confirm our previous finding of significant neuronal losses in the CA1 (48%), hilus (14%), and subiculum (24%) in AD [Lancet 344 (1994) 769]. However, we did not observe a significant loss of neurons in CA1 or any of the other subdivisions of the hippocampus in preclinical AD.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2003.12.005

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

3 of 29 cited sources checked · 2 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 32 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 12
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 11
22 of 22
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Individuals with preclinical Alzheimer's disease (cognitively intact with substantial AD neuropathology) would have developed clinical Alzheimer's disease had they lived long enough.

    “An important caveat with the concept of preclinical AD is that we are making the assumption that those individuals, had they live long enough, would have developed clinical AD.”
1 of 1

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • CA1 total sampling fraction does not match its components

    Minor

    The listed CA1 sampling fractions imply a reciprocal total fraction of 36,846, not the reported 34,500.

    Reported 34500 · recomputed 36846

  • Only four AD cases exceed the stated MMSE threshold

    Minor

    The paper says five AD cases had MMSE scores above 16. Table 1 shows that the fifth-highest score is exactly 16, leaving only four cases above the threshold.

  • Male-only table includes all 11 controls

    Minor

    Table 4 is labeled as an analysis of males and lists 11 controls, but Table 1 identifies one of the 11 controls as female. A male-only control group would contain 10 subjects.

  • Section sampling fraction has two incompatible definitions

    Minor

    Table A.1 lists the section sampling fraction as 1/30, but its explanatory note defines ssf as 30. Those are reciprocals, so the notation is inconsistent.

4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 43 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Folstein MF, Bylsma FW. Noncognitive symptoms of Alzheimer disease. In: Terry RD, Katzman R, Bick KL, Sisodia SS, editors. Alzheimer disease. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999. p. 25–37.
  2. Morris JC. Clinical presentation and course of Alzheimer disease. In: Terry RD, Katzman R, Bick KL, Sisodia SS, editors. Alzheimer disease. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999. p. 11–24.
  3. Terry RD, Masliah E, Hansen L. The neuropathology of Alzheimer disease and the structural basis of its cognitive alterations. In: Terry RD, Katzman R, Bick KL, Sisodia SS, editors. Alzheimer disease. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999. p. 187–206.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–106 of 106

Metadata

Authors
West, M. J., Kawas, C. H., Stewart, W. F., Rudow, G. L., & Troncoso, J. C.
Affiliations
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Troncoso, Juan C
Venue
Neurobiology of Aging
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-10
Volume
25
Issue
9
Pages
1205-1212
ISSN
0197-4580 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2048251539
Cited by
317
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 16
FWCI
7.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurobiology of Aging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P50AG005146, AG 05146)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
Keywords
preclinical Alzheimer's disease, hippocampal neurons, neuronal loss, CA1 region, subiculum, hilus, amyloid deposits, postmortem brain, stereology, aging
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Cell Count, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nerve Degeneration, Neurons, Cell Death, Disease Progression, Dentate Gyrus

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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