Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Find studies

Showing 26–50 of 86 studies in Cognitive tests and assessment · tagged Biomarkers (page 2 of 4) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 86 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “Cognitive tests and assessment” covers

Cognitive tests and assessment — Memory and thinking tests, screening tools and rating scales: how well they measure what they claim to.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Our results demonstrated that dual-task could significantly improve the ability to predict cognitive impairment based on gait parameters such as gait speed (GS) and stride length (SL). 5 key findings →

Participants: 38 Evidence: low

BackgroundCognitive impairment significantly impacts the quality of life in patients with neurodegenerative disorders, including Huntington's disease (HD), Parkinson's disease (PD), and Alzheimer's disease (AD).ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the utility of MemTrax, a contemporary digital continuous recognition task platform originally developed for AD, as an effective tool for revealing cognitive and clinical motor impairments in HD and PD populations as aligned with respective disease staging. 2 key findings →

Participants: 135 Evidence: low

Low levels of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) beta-amyloid 1-42 (Abeta42) and high total tau (T-tau) are diagnostic for manifest Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Predicting brain amyloid load with digital and blood-based biomarkers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2025-07-05

The combination of MemTrax and BBMs provides an accurate, convenient, non-invasive, cost-effective and scalable way to estimate Aβ load, which provides an opportunity for mass screening and timely and accurate diagnosis of AD. 3 key findings →

Participants: 349 Evidence: low

Low n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) status may be associated with neuro-degenerative disorders, in particular Alzheimer's disease, which has been associated with poor dietary fish or n-3 PUFA intake, and low docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) status. 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate

The BHA measures are significantly associated with both Aβ and regional tau in vivo imaging markers and could be used for the identification of patients with suspected AD pathology in clinical practice. 3 key findings →

Participants: 140 Evidence: low

Our research proposes that reading-derived speech data facilitates the differentiation between cognitively impaired individuals and cognitively intact, age-matched older adults. 4 key findings →

Participants: 59 Evidence: low

In the ADMET2 biomarker subset (n = 44, MPH:21, age:75 years, MMSE:20.2), higher baseline TNF was associated with higher M6 NPI-A [B(SE)= 6.86 (1.71), p = .0003], and multivariable models found lower baseline TNF [B(SE)= 8.28(1.61), p < .001] and higher baseline S100B [B(SE)= -6.41(1.95), p = .002] were associated with lower M6 NPI-A. Exploratory analyses suggested that higher baseline NfL significantly interacted with treatment to predict lower M6 NPI-A [B(SE)= -8.36(4.21), p = .05], only when adjusting for cognition. 5 key findings →

Participants: 44 Evidence: high

Disease-modifying treatment trials are increasingly advanced to the prodromal or preclinical phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and inclusion criteria are based on biomarkers rather than clinical symptoms. 4 key findings →

Participants: 13 Evidence: low

Elevated CSF τ is considered a biomarker of neuronal injury in newly developed Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) criteria. 4 key findings →

Participants: 24 Evidence: low

Our results suggest that the ki:e SB-C is an objective, scalable, and reliable indicator of cognitive decline, fit for purpose as a remote assessment in clinical early dementia trials. 3 key findings →

Participants: 69 Evidence: low

Both DELPHI analysis of network function and DTI analysis detected a significant decrease in connectivity, excitability, and WM integrity in the SCD group compared to healthy control (HC) subjects; a significant decrease was also noted for aMCI and Dementia groups compared to HC. 3 key findings →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

Biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: 2025

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) 2026-01-01

Biomarkers play an important role in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials in several contexts of use, including defining trial eligibility and serving as outcome measures. 5 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid alpha-synuclein in neurodegenerative disorders-a marker of synapse loss?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Neuroscience letters 2008-11-12

The association of alpha-synuclein (alpha-syn) neuropathology with Parkinson's disease (PD) and several related disorders has led to an intense research effort to develop cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)- or blood-based alpha-syn biomarkers for these types of diseases. 4 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of tau protein were measured using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay which measures both normal and hyperphosphorylated tau. 4 key findings →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

Soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment proteins receptors (SNARE) proteins, such as VAMP-2 and SNAP-25, are implicated in α-synuclein pathophysiology and CSF levels of these proteins are associated with pathophysiological biomarkers and cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Participants: 62 Evidence: moderate

Moreover, we found, in either the whole AD population or both subgroups, a CSF profile in which higher 4 key findings →

Participants: 145 Evidence: low

Decades of research has established a shift from an "eveningness" preference to a "morningness" preference with increasing age. 4 key findings →

Participants: 169 Evidence: low

These findings suggest that AD biomarker levels may be differentially predictive of specific cognitive functions many years later. 5 key findings →

Participants: 67 Evidence: moderate

This study demonstrated DCBs' ability to distinguish , at baseline, between impending cognitive decline and non-decline groups where individuals in both groups were classified as cognitively normal. 5 key findings →

Participants: 61 Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled. Show only studies that are free to read

How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped

This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor, and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself, so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.

  • Journal tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomized / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multicenter collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up to 2 pts

Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science, Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the tier-3 journals apart.

Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.

We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.

The score is computed from the published data alone and is reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.

See the whole rubric drawn out → — four charts covering all 31,380 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.

What this library is — and isn't

This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here, that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.

1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 of those are preprints posted before any journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a peer-reviewed article.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed    Where this research is being discussed: events