Cited by 76

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Anatomical MRI and DTI in the Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease: A European Multicenter Study

Teipel, Stefan J., the EDSD study group, Wegrzyn, Martin, Meindl, Thomas, Frisoni, Giovanni, Bokde, Arun L.W., Fellgiebel, Andreas, Filippi, Massimo, Hampel, Harald, Klöppel, Stefan, Hauenstein, Karlheinz, Ewers, Michael·2012·Journal of Alzheimer's Disease

Abstract

Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) detects microstructural changes of the cerebral white matter in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The use of DTI for the diagnosis of AD in a multicenter setting has not yet been investigated. We used voxel-based analysis of fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, and grey matter volumes from multimodal magnetic resonance imaging data of 137 AD patients and 143 healthy elderly controls collected across 9 different scanners. We compared different univariate analysis approaches to model the effect of scanner, including a linear model across all scans with a scanner covariate, a random effects model with scanner as a random variable as well as a voxel-based meta-analysis. We found significant reduction of fractional anisotropy and significant increase of mean diffusivity in core areas of AD pathology including corpus callosum, medial and lateral temporal lobes, as well as fornix, cingulate gyrus, precuneus, and prefrontal lobe white matter. Grey matter atrophy was most pronounced in medial and lateral temporal lobe as well as parietal and prefrontal association cortex. The effects of group were spatially more restricted with random effects modeling of scanner effects compared to simple pooled analysis. All three analysis approaches yielded similar accuracy of group separation in block-wise cross-validated logistic regression. Our results suggest similar effects of center on group separation based on different analysis approaches and confirm a typical patt…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3233/jad-2012-112118

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 76

Metadata

Authors
Teipel, S. J., the EDSD study group, Wegrzyn, M., Meindl, T., Frisoni, G., Bokde, A. L. W., Fellgiebel, A., Filippi, M., Hampel, H., Klöppel, S., Hauenstein, K., & Ewers, M.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychiatry, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
  • DZNE, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Rostock, Germany
  • Institute for Clinical Radiology, Department of MRI, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany
  • LENITEM Laboratory of Epidemiology, Neuroimaging and Telemedicine, IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio, FBF, Brescia, Italy
  • Cognitive Systems Group, Discipline of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  • Department of Psychiatry, University Medical Center of Mainz, Mainz, Germany
  • Neuroimaging Research Unit, Institute of Experimental Neurology, Division of Neuroscience, Scientific Institute and University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
  • Department of Psychiatry, Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
  • Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Freiburg Brain Imaging, University Clinic Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
  • Department of Radiology, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
  • Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco, USA
Venue
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
Published
2012-09-18
Volume
31
Issue
s3
Pages
S33-S47
ISSN
  • 1875-8908
  • 1387-2877
Cited by
76
References
0

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