sh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-anglia-ruskin-university
  • apa-old-doi-prefix.csl
  • sodertorns-hogskola-harvard.csl
  • sodertorns-hogskola-oxford.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Empirical assessment of biases in cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers of alzheimer’s disease: An umbrella review and re-analysis of data from meta-analyses
Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Yonsei University, Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, South Korea.
Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Show others and affiliations
2021 (English)In: European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, ISSN 1128-3602, Vol. 25, no 3, p. 1536-1547Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE: Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a leading cause of years lived with disability in older age, and several cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) markers have been proposed in individual meta-analyses to be associated with AD but field-wide evaluation and scrutiny of the literature is not available. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed an umbrella review for the reported associations between CSF biomarkers and AD. Data from available meta-analyses were reanalyzed using both random and fixed effects models. We also estimated between-study heterogeneity, small-study effects, excess significance, and prediction interval. RESULTS: A total of 38 meta-analyses on CSF markers from 11 eligible articles were identified and reanalyzed. In 14 (36%) of the meta-analyses, the summary estimate and the results of the largest study showed non-concordant results in terms of statistical significance. Large heterogeneity (I2≥75%) was observed in 73% and small-study effects under Egger’s test were shown in 28% of CSF biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that there is an excess of statistically significant results and significant biases in the literature of CSF biomarkers for AD. Therefore, the results of CSF biomarkers should be interpreted with caution.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Verduci Publisher , 2021. Vol. 25, no 3, p. 1536-1547
Keywords [en]
Alzheimer’s disease, CSF biomarkers, Excess significance, Meta-analysis, Umbrella review
National Category
Neurosciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-44495DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202102_24862ISI: 000619780200043PubMedID: 33629323Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85101121093OAI: oai:DiVA.org:sh-44495DiVA, id: diva2:1536024
Available from: 2021-03-09 Created: 2021-03-09 Last updated: 2021-12-09Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Stickley, Andrew

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Stickley, Andrew
By organisation
SCOHOST (Stockholm Centre for Health and Social Change)
In the same journal
European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences
Neurosciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 40 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-anglia-ruskin-university
  • apa-old-doi-prefix.csl
  • sodertorns-hogskola-harvard.csl
  • sodertorns-hogskola-oxford.csl
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf