Jiangling Jiang, Hongyan Wang, Wei Li, Xinyi Cao, Chunbo Li
Abstract
Background: Detection of retinal β-amyloid (Aβ) peptide accumulation is a novel diagnostic method for Alzheimer's disease (AD), but there is, as yet, no conclusive evidence of its accuracy. Aim: To identify the diagnostic accuracy of pathological retinal Aβ detection for AD by a meta-analytic approach. Methods: Electronic and reference searches were conducted to identify studies related to the diagnostic effects of retinal Aβ detection in AD that met pre-defined inclusion criteria. The QUADAS-2 tool was employed to assess the risk of bias, and Review Manager plus the Open Meta-Analyst were used to perform the data analysis. Results: From 493 unduplicated reports, five studies with small sample sizes were included in this review. Six staining methods were employed. The eligible studies showed extremely broad ranges of sensitivity (0-1.00) and specificity (0.50-1.00) with substantial heterogeneity. The estimates of positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were also extremely varied (from 0.71 to 11.57 for PLR, from 0.04 to 1.11 for NLR, and from 0.69 to 297.00 for DOR). Conclusions: The limited number of eligible studies and their methodological heterogeneity make it impossible to come to a conclusion whether pathological retinal Aβ detection is an effective diagnostic tool for AD. More studies, especially large surveys investigating retina Aβ load with quantitative methods among consecutive or random samples, are needed to determine the accuracy of Aβ detection for diagnosing AD.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2021.
All research outputs
#6,887,467
of 25,766,791 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,859
of 5,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,311
of 319,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#48
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,766,791 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,572 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
