Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
 
Articles by Marilyn S. Albert
Total Records ( 3 ) for Marilyn S. Albert
  Zaven S. Khachaturian , Deborah Barnes , Richard Einstein , Sterling Johnson , Virginia Lee , Allen Roses , Mark A. Sager , William R. Shankle , Peter J. Snyder , Ronald C. Petersen , Gerard Schellenberg , John Trojanowski , Paul Aisen , Marilyn S. Albert , John C.S. Breitner , Neil Buckholtz , Maria Carrillo , Steven Ferris , Barry D. Greenberg , Michael Grundman , Ara S. Khachaturian , Lewis H. Kuller , Oscar L. Lopez , Paul Maruff , Richard C. Mohs , Marcelle Morrison- Bogorad , Creighton Phelps , Eric Reiman , Marwan Sabbagh , Mary Sano , Lon S. Schneider , Eric Siemers , Pierre Tariot , Jacques Touchon , Bruno Vellas and Lisa J. Bain
  Among the major impediments to the design of clinical trials for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most critical is the lack of validated biomarkers, assessment tools, and algorithms that would facilitate identification of asymptomatic individuals with elevated risk who might be recruited as study volunteers. Thus, the Leon Thal Symposium 2009 (LTS'09), on October 27–28, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada, was convened to explore strategies to surmount the barriers in designing a multisite, comparative study to evaluate and validate various approaches for detecting and selecting asymptomatic people at risk for cognitive disorders/dementia. The deliberations of LTS'09 included presentations and reviews of different approaches (algorithms, biomarkers, or measures) for identifying asymptomatic individuals at elevated risk for AD who would be candidates for longitudinal or prevention studies. The key nested recommendations of LTS'09 included: (1) establishment of a National Database for Longitudinal Studies as a shared research core resource; (2) launch of a large collaborative study that will compare multiple screening approaches and biomarkers to determine the best method for identifying asymptomatic people at risk for AD; (3) initiation of a Global Database that extends the concept of the National Database for Longitudinal Studies for longitudinal studies beyond the United States; and (4) development of an educational campaign that will address public misconceptions about AD and promote healthy brain aging.
  Clifford R. Jack , Marilyn S. Albert , David S. Knopman , Guy M. McKhann , Reisa A. Sperling , Maria C. Carrillo , Bill Thies and Creighton H. Phelps
  Background Criteria for the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) were established in 1984. A broad consensus now exists that these criteria should be revised to incorporate state-of-the-art scientific knowledge. Methods The National Institute on Aging (NIA) and the Alzheimer's Association sponsored a series of advisory round table meetings in 2009 whose purpose was to establish a process for revising diagnostic and research criteria for AD. The recommendation from these advisory meetings was that three separate work groups should be formed with each assigned the task of formulating diagnostic criteria for one phase of the disease: the dementia phase; the symptomatic, pre-dementia phase; and the asymptomatic, preclinical phase of AD. Results Two notable differences from the AD criteria published in 1984 are incorporation of biomarkers of the underlying disease state and formalization of different stages of disease in the diagnostic criteria. There was a broad consensus within all three workgroups that much additional work is needed to validate the application of biomarkers for diagnostic purposes. In the revised NIA-Alzheimer's Association criteria, a semantic and conceptual distinction is made between AD pathophysiological processes and clinically observable syndromes that result, whereas this distinction was blurred in the 1984 criteria. Conclusions The new criteria for AD are presented in three documents. The core clinical criteria of the recommendations regarding AD dementia and MCI due to AD are intended to guide diagnosis in the clinical setting. However, the recommendations of the preclinical AD workgroup are intended purely for research purposes.
  Peter J. Snyder , Colleen E. Jackson , Ronald C. Petersen , Ara S. Khachaturian , Jeffrey Kaye , Marilyn S. Albert and Sandra Weintraub
  The demand for rapidly administered, sensitive, and reliable cognitive assessments that are specifically designed for identifying individuals in the earliest stages of cognitive decline (and to measure subtle change over time) has escalated as the emphasis in Alzheimer‘s disease clinical research has shifted from clinical diagnosis and treatment toward the goal of developing presymptomatic neuroprotective therapies. To meet these changing clinical requirements, cognitive measures or tailored batteries of tests must be validated and determined to be fit-for-use for the discrimination between cognitively healthy individuals and persons who are experiencing very subtle cognitive changes that likely signal the emergence of early mild cognitive impairment. We sought to collect and review data systematically from a wide variety of (mostly computer-administered) cognitive measures, all of which are currently marketed or distributed with the claims that these instruments are sensitive and reliable for the early identification of disease or, if untested for this purpose, are promising tools based on other variables. The survey responses for 16 measures/batteries are presented in brief in this review; full survey responses and summary tables are archived and publicly available on the Campaign to Prevent Alzheimer‘s Disease by 2020 Web site (http://pad2020.org). A decision tree diagram highlighting critical decision points for selecting measures to meet varying clinical trials requirements has also been provided. Ultimately, the survey questionnaire, framework, and decision guidelines provided in this review should remain as useful aids for the evaluation of any new or updated sets of instruments in the years to come.
 
 
 
Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility