4.2 Article

Cognition, language, and clinical pathological features of non-Alzheimer's dementias: An overview

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS
卷 43, 期 5, 页码 438-452

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcomdis.2010.04.011

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDCD NIH HHS [K23 DC010197-01, K23 DC010197] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are many distinct forms of dementia whose pharmacological and behavioral management differ. Differential diagnosis among the dementia variants currently relies upon a weighted combination of genetic and protein biomarkers, neuroanatomical integrity, and behavior. Diagnostic specificity is complicated by a high degree of overlap in the initial presenting symptoms across dementia subtypes. For this reason, reliable markers are of considerable diagnostic value. Communication disorders have proven to be among the strongest predictors for discriminating among dementia subtypes. As such, speech-language pathologists may be poised to make an increasingly visible contribution to dementia diagnosis and its ongoing management. The value and durability of this potential contribution, however, demands an improved discipline-wide knowledge base about the unique features associated with different dementia variants. To this end we provide an overview of cognition, language, and clinical pathological features of four of the most common non-Alzheimer's dementias: frontotemporal dementia, vascular dementia, Lewy body disease dementia, and Parkinson's disease dementia. Learning outcomes: Readers will learn characteristics and distinguishing features of several non-Alzheimer's dementias, including Parkinson's disease dementia, frontotemporal dementia, vascular dementia, and Lewy body dementia. Readers will also learn to distinguish between several variants of frontotemporal dementia. Finally, readers will gain knowledge of the term primary progressive aphasia as it relates to the aforementioned dementia etiologies. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据