The neuropathological examination is considered to provide the gold standard for Alzheimer disease (AD). To determine the accuracy of currently employed clinical diagnostic methods, clinical and neuropathological data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC), which gathers information from the network of National Institute on Aging (NIA)-sponsored Alzheimer's Disease Centers (ADCs), were collected as part of the NACC Uniform Data Set (UDS) between 2005 and 2010. A database search initially included all 1198 subjects with at least one UDS clinical assessment and who had died and been autopsied; 279 were excluded as being not demented or because critical data fields were missing. The final subject number was 919. Sensitivity and specificity were determined based on “probable” and “possible” AD levels of clinical confidence and 4 levels of neuropathological confidence based on varying neuritic plaque densities and Braak neurofibrillary stages. Sensitivity ranged from 70.9% to 87.3%; specificity ranged from 44.3% to 70.8%. Sensitivity was generally increased with more permissive clinical criteria and specificity was increased with more restrictive criteria, whereas the opposite was true for neuropathological criteria. When a clinical diagnosis was not confirmed by minimum levels of AD histopathology, the most frequent primary neuropathological diagnoses were tangle-only dementia or argyrophilic grain disease, frontotemporal lobar degeneration, cerebrovascular disease, Lewy body disease and hippocampal sclerosis. When dementia was not clinically diagnosed as AD, 39% of these cases met or exceeded minimum threshold levels of AD histopathology. Neurologists of the NIA-ADCs had higher predictive accuracy when they diagnosed AD in demented subjects than when they diagnosed dementing diseases other than AD. The misdiagnosis rate should be considered when estimating subject numbers for AD studies, including clinical trials and epidemiological studies.

No abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between obesity and patient‐administered outcome measures after total joint arthroplasty. Research Methods and Procedures: A voluntary questionnaire‐based registry contained 592 primary total hip arthroplasty patients and 1011 primary total knee arthroplasty patients with preoperative and 1‐year data. Using logistic regression, the relationships between body mass index and the several outcome measures, including Short Form‐36 and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, were examined. Results: There was no difference between obese and non‐obese patients regarding satisfaction, decision to repeat surgery, and Δphysical component summary, Δmental component summary, and ΔWestern Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores (p > 0.05 for all). Body mass index was associated with an increased risk of having difficulty descending or ascending stairs at 1 year (odds ratio, 1.2 to 1.3). Discussion: Obese patients enjoy as much improvement and satisfaction as other patients from total joint arthroplasty.

These data suggest the need for systematic review of vaccine-preventable incidents to examine the effect of exemptors, increased surveillance of the number of exemptors and cases among them, and research to determine the reasons why individuals claim exemptions.

Background: The role of exogenous hormone exposures in the development of meningioma is unclear, but these exposures have been proposed as one hypothesis to explain the over-abundance of such tumors in women.