疾病定义的改变:阿尔茨海默病诊断标准的转变

IF 13 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Lennart H. van der Molen, Marianne Boenink, Harro van Lente, Edo Richard
{"title":"疾病定义的改变:阿尔茨海默病诊断标准的转变","authors":"Lennart H. van der Molen,&nbsp;Marianne Boenink,&nbsp;Harro van Lente,&nbsp;Edo Richard","doi":"10.1002/alz.70133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\n \n <p>Whether Alzheimer's disease (AD) should be defined by symptoms, biological processes, or both, is a matter of debate. We aim to reconstruct the motivations, aims, and content of consecutive versions of AD diagnostic criteria.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> METHODS</h3>\n \n <p>We systematically analyzed publications on AD diagnostic criteria between 1984 and 2024.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\n \n <p>Early diagnosis and incorporating recent scientific findings are recurring aims for criteria revisions but aims and motivations for revising are often unclear or ambiguous and reflection on previous criteria is lacking. The subsequent criteria, except International Working Group (IWG) 2021/2024, consistently lower the threshold for diagnosing AD and increasingly focus on amyloid β and tau biomarkers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\n \n <p>Subsequent AD criteria show an increasing “biomarkerization,” but it is often unclear what problems revised criteria should solve and how effective they are. To overcome these limitations, future revisions should evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of previous criteria, and define clear problems and aims.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Highlights</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Early diagnosis and incorporating scientific insights are recurring aims.</li>\n \n <li>The aims of new criteria are often not clearly articulated or ambiguous.</li>\n \n <li>The number of requirements for an AD diagnosis decreases over time.</li>\n \n <li>Consecutive criteria for research and clinical use did not result in clear terminology.</li>\n \n <li>The AD definition is increasingly narrowed to amyloid β and tau.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":7471,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","volume":"21 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.70133","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Changing definitions of disease: Transformations in the diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease\",\"authors\":\"Lennart H. van der Molen,&nbsp;Marianne Boenink,&nbsp;Harro van Lente,&nbsp;Edo Richard\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/alz.70133\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> INTRODUCTION</h3>\\n \\n <p>Whether Alzheimer's disease (AD) should be defined by symptoms, biological processes, or both, is a matter of debate. We aim to reconstruct the motivations, aims, and content of consecutive versions of AD diagnostic criteria.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> METHODS</h3>\\n \\n <p>We systematically analyzed publications on AD diagnostic criteria between 1984 and 2024.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> RESULTS</h3>\\n \\n <p>Early diagnosis and incorporating recent scientific findings are recurring aims for criteria revisions but aims and motivations for revising are often unclear or ambiguous and reflection on previous criteria is lacking. The subsequent criteria, except International Working Group (IWG) 2021/2024, consistently lower the threshold for diagnosing AD and increasingly focus on amyloid β and tau biomarkers.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> DISCUSSION</h3>\\n \\n <p>Subsequent AD criteria show an increasing “biomarkerization,” but it is often unclear what problems revised criteria should solve and how effective they are. To overcome these limitations, future revisions should evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of previous criteria, and define clear problems and aims.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Highlights</h3>\\n \\n <div>\\n <ul>\\n \\n <li>Early diagnosis and incorporating scientific insights are recurring aims.</li>\\n \\n <li>The aims of new criteria are often not clearly articulated or ambiguous.</li>\\n \\n <li>The number of requirements for an AD diagnosis decreases over time.</li>\\n \\n <li>Consecutive criteria for research and clinical use did not result in clear terminology.</li>\\n \\n <li>The AD definition is increasingly narrowed to amyloid β and tau.</li>\\n </ul>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"volume\":\"21 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/alz.70133\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer's & Dementia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.70133\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer's & Dementia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz.70133","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:阿尔茨海默病(AD)究竟应该根据症状、生物过程还是两者来定义,这是一个争论不休的问题。我们旨在重构连续版本的阿尔茨海默病诊断标准的动机、目的和内容。 方法 我们系统分析了 1984 年至 2024 年间有关 AD 诊断标准的出版物。 结果 早期诊断和纳入最新科学发现是标准修订的经常性目标,但修订的目标和动机往往不明确或含糊不清,也缺乏对以前标准的反思。除国际工作组(IWG)2021/2024 号标准外,后续标准一直在降低诊断 AD 的阈值,并越来越关注淀粉样蛋白 β 和 tau 生物标记物。 讨论 随后的 AD 标准显示出越来越多的 "生物标记化 "趋势,但往往不清楚修订后的标准应解决什么问题以及其效果如何。为了克服这些局限性,未来的标准修订应评估之前标准的有效性和影响,并明确问题和目标。 要点 早期诊断和纳入科学见解是反复出现的目标。 新标准的目标往往表述不清或含糊不清。 随着时间的推移,对注意力缺失症诊断的要求也在减少。 研究和临床使用的连续标准没有形成明确的术语。 注意力缺失症的定义日益缩小到淀粉样蛋白 β 和 tau。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Changing definitions of disease: Transformations in the diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease

Changing definitions of disease: Transformations in the diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease

INTRODUCTION

Whether Alzheimer's disease (AD) should be defined by symptoms, biological processes, or both, is a matter of debate. We aim to reconstruct the motivations, aims, and content of consecutive versions of AD diagnostic criteria.

METHODS

We systematically analyzed publications on AD diagnostic criteria between 1984 and 2024.

RESULTS

Early diagnosis and incorporating recent scientific findings are recurring aims for criteria revisions but aims and motivations for revising are often unclear or ambiguous and reflection on previous criteria is lacking. The subsequent criteria, except International Working Group (IWG) 2021/2024, consistently lower the threshold for diagnosing AD and increasingly focus on amyloid β and tau biomarkers.

DISCUSSION

Subsequent AD criteria show an increasing “biomarkerization,” but it is often unclear what problems revised criteria should solve and how effective they are. To overcome these limitations, future revisions should evaluate the effectiveness and impacts of previous criteria, and define clear problems and aims.

Highlights

  • Early diagnosis and incorporating scientific insights are recurring aims.
  • The aims of new criteria are often not clearly articulated or ambiguous.
  • The number of requirements for an AD diagnosis decreases over time.
  • Consecutive criteria for research and clinical use did not result in clear terminology.
  • The AD definition is increasingly narrowed to amyloid β and tau.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Alzheimer's & Dementia 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
299
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Alzheimer's & Dementia is a peer-reviewed journal that aims to bridge knowledge gaps in dementia research by covering the entire spectrum, from basic science to clinical trials to social and behavioral investigations. It provides a platform for rapid communication of new findings and ideas, optimal translation of research into practical applications, increasing knowledge across diverse disciplines for early detection, diagnosis, and intervention, and identifying promising new research directions. In July 2008, Alzheimer's & Dementia was accepted for indexing by MEDLINE, recognizing its scientific merit and contribution to Alzheimer's research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信