Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Longitudinal Follow-Up of 550 Mild Cognitive Impairment Patients: Evidence for Large Conversion to Dementia Rates and Detection of Major Risk Factors Involved

Espinosa, Ana, Alegret, Montserrat, Valero, Sergi, Vinyes-Junqué, Georgina, Hernández, Isabel, Mauleón, Ana, Rosende-Roca, Maitée, Ruiz, Agustín, López, Oscar, Tárraga, Lluís, Boada, Mercè·2013·Journal of Alzheimer's Disease

Abstract

The most recent studies about mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are focused on the search for factors that make patients more vulnerable to conversion to dementia, mainly Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aim of this study was to determine which neuropsychological test performances, including episodic memory profiles, and genetic risk factors (APOE ε4) better predict early conversion to dementia among the four MCI subtypes. Data from 550 MCI patients were analyzed for the purpose of this study and were classified according to Petersen's criteria (2004), and also taking into account the absence (probable MCI) or presence (possible MCI) of comorbidities that could explain cognitive deficits. MCI cases were divided into Probable amnestic (Pr-aMCI) (n = 115), probable non-amnestic (Pr-naMCI) (n = 37), possible amnestic (Pss-aMCI) (n = 234), and possible non-amnestic (Pss-naMCI) (n = 164), single or multiple domain. In the whole MCI sample, regression analysis showed that low performances on Orientation, Verbal Delayed Recall of the Word List Learning test from WMS-III, and Luria's Clock test were associated with conversion to dementia, independently of APOE ε4 allele. Cox proportional-hazards showed that the Probable MCI subtype, presence of storage memory impairment, multiple domain condition, and presence of at least one ε4 allele increased the risk of conversion to dementia. Multivariate survival and Kapplan-Meier analyses showed that the Pr-aMCI with storage memory impairment had the most and closest risk of conversion to dementia. In conclusion, the Pr-aMCI subset of patients had 8.5 times more risk of converting to dementia than the Pss-naMCI group, who displayed the slowest conversion rate to dementia.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/jad-122002

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Espinosa, A., Alegret, M., Valero, S., Vinyes-Junqué, G., Hernández, I., Mauleón, A., Rosende-Roca, M., Ruiz, A., López, O., Tárraga, L., & Boada, M.
Venue
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
Published
2013-03-04
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
769-780
ISSN
  • 1387-2877 (ISSN-L)
  • 1875-8908
OpenAlex
W1589469155
Cited by
183
References
12
FWCI
11.06
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: A Longitudinal Follow-Up of 550 Mild Cognitive Impairment Patients: Evidence for Large Conversion to Dementia Rates and Detection of Major Risk Factors Involved. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3233/jad-122002
The paper
Espinosa, A., Alegret, M., Valero, S., Vinyes-Junqué, G., Hernández, I., Mauleón, A., Rosende-Roca, M., Ruiz, A., López, O., Tárraga, L., & Boada, M. (2013). A Longitudinal Follow-Up of 550 Mild Cognitive Impairment Patients: Evidence for Large Conversion to Dementia Rates and Detection of Major Risk Factors Involved. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-122002

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.