Study

Country

Criteria

Genotyping methods

AD

Control

N (% Female)

Mean age

N (% Female)

Mean age

Beyer [12]

Spain

DSM-IV;  NINCDS-ADRDA

RFLP

172(62%)

70.8

166 (60%)

68.7

Bosco [13]

Italy

CERAD

RFLP

152 (54%)

74.8

136 (55%)

69.3

Dorszewska [15]

Poland

NINCDS-ADRDA

RFLP

38(61%)

66.3 ± 12.2

50 (68%)

44.6 ± 16.2

Giedraitis [18]

Sweden (ULSAM)

NINCDS-ADRDA; DSM-IV

high and ultra-high throughput genotyping

86 (0%)

80.2(AAO)

404 (0%)

81.8

Li [17]

Canada

NINCDS-ADRDA

GWAS

753 (58%)

77.8 ±8.6

736 (64%)

73.4 ± 7.9

Linnebank [14]

Germany

DSM-IV

RFLP

162 (68%)

72 ±9

169 (56%)

71 ± 7

Reiman [16]

USA, Netherlands

NM

GWAS

861 (-)

74.9 ± 6.6

550 (-)

77.4 ± 7.3

Zhao [19]

China

DSM-IV; NINCDS-ADRDA

RFLP

353 (52%)

68.9 ± 9.2 (AAO)

346 (47%)

68.5 ± 9.1

Coppede [20]

Italy

DSM-IV; NINCDS-ADRDA

RFLP

375(63%)

74.2±6.46

307(63%)

71.7±8.02

Note: ULSAM, Uppsala Longitudinal Study of Adult Men; DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV; NINCDS-ADRDA, the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke–Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Disorders Association; CERAD, the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease .NM, Not mentioned; RFLP, restriction fragment length polymorphism; GWAS, genome-wide association study; AAO, Age at onset
Table 1: Clinical characteristics of the populations included in the meta analysis.