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 Helpline800-272-390024 hours a day, 365 days a yearFree, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline98824/7Call 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) Helpline866-232-84849:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a weekLicensed 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.
Research
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 3,401–3,425 of 3,569 studies · tagged Biomarkers(page 137 of 143)· 28,580 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)
From OpenAlex; 14,058 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.
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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Clinical Chemistry·2026-04-21
Alzheimer disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia globally and is defined by the presence of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles formed by the accumulation of phosphorylated tau (p-tau). 2 key findings →
Η νευρωνική εκφύλιση και δυσλειτουργία αποτελούν χαρακτηριστικά γνωρίσματα των νευροεκφυλιστικών ασθενειών. Σημαντική πρόκληση είναι η ανάπτυξη αξιόπιστων διαγνωστικών εργαλείων που θα επιτρέπουν την έγκαιρη διάγνωση των νόσων αυτών. Πρώτος στόχος της παρούσας διδακτορικής διατριβής είναι ο ποσοτικός προσδιορισμός επιλεγμένων πρωτεϊνικών βιοδεικτών στο εγκεφαλονωτιαίο υγρό (ΕΝΥ) και στο αίμα, με σκοπό την υποστήριξη της διαφορικής διάγνωσης διαφόρων νευροεκφυλιστικών ασθενειών. Εφαρμόστηκαν μονοπλεκτικές δοκιμασίες για τον εντοπισμό του uPAR σε ασθενείς με σποραδική νόσο Creutzfeldt-Jakob, καθώς και των TAU, α-synuclein (α-syn), YKL-40 σε ασθενείς με συνουκλεϊνοπάθειες. Η έλλειψη ευαισθησίας και ειδικότητας των μονοπλεκτικών δοκιμασιών οδήγησε στην αξιοποίηση της πολυπλεκτικής πλατφόρμας SIMOA τεσσάρων βιοδεικτών (GFAP, NfL, TAU, UCH-L1), σε δύο διαφορετικές κλινικές κοόρτες. Στους ασθενείς με νόσο Alzheimer (AD) και μετωποκροταφική άνοια (FTD), ο βιοδείκτης με την καλύτερη διαγνωστική απόδοση ήταν ο UCH-L1 στο ΕΝΥ, με τιμές διαχωρισμού στα >1260 pg/mL για AD και >1052 pg/mL για FTD. Η NfL στο ΕΝΥ έδειξε καλή διαγνωστική ακρίβεια για τη διάκριση ασθενών με AD και FTD από υγιείς μάρτυρες, με τιμή διαχωρισμού >688,8 pg/mL και >463,9 pg/mL, αντίστοιχα. Η TAU στο ΕΝΥ εμφάνισε τη δεύτερη καλύτερη απόδοση μετά το UCH-L1 για τη διάκριση των AD από μάρτυρες, με τιμή διαχωρισμού >137,0 pg/mL, ενώ έδειξε καλή ακρίβεια και στη διάκριση των AD από τους FTD. Επίσης, καλή διαγνωστική ικανότητα παρατηρήθηκε στη διάκριση FTD από μάρτυρες με τιμή διαχωρισμού >111,3 pg/mL. Τέλος, η GFAP στο ΕΝΥ παρουσίασε μετρίου βαθμού ακρίβεια στη διάκριση AD από ομάδα μαρτύρων με τιμή διαχωρισμού >5942 pg/mL. Στη Σκλήρυνση κατά πλάκας (MS) και στο Kλινικά μεμονωμένο σύνδρομο (CIS), η NfL ορού και ΕΝΥ έδειξε μέτρια διαγνωστική ακρίβεια στη διάκριση των MS από τους μάρτυρες, με τιμές διαχωρισμού >5,909 pg/mL και >453,4 pg/mL, αντίστοιχα. Η GFAP ορού παρουσίασε μέτρια διακριτική ικανότητα με τιμή διαχωρισμού >48,08 pg/mL στους MS έναντι των υγιών. Ενώ τέλος η TAU ήταν ο βιοδείκτης με την καλύτερη απόδοση στη διάκριση MS / CIS από τους μάρτυρες, με τιμή διαχωρισμού στον ορό >0,5823 / >0,5950 pg/mL, αντίστοιχα, ενώ στο ΕΝΥ <76,47 / <75,26 pg/mL, αντίστοιχα. Δεύτερος στόχος της μελέτης, είναι η διερεύνηση του ρόλου των νευρωνικών εξωσωμάτων στην παθογένεση και εξάπλωση των νευροεκφυλιστικών ασθενειών (με έμφαση στη νόσο Prion). Για τον σκοπό αυτό αξιοποιήθηκε παθολογικό μοντέλο μυός RML, το οπ 2 key findings →
This study aimed to assess the diagnostic contribution of Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography (FDG-PET) in neurodegenerative dementias presenting with language-predominant symptoms, with or without accompanying behavioral changes, and to evaluate the correspondence between PET-derived metabolic patterns and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers. 4 key findings →
The dominant research paradigm for Alzheimer's disease has focused on amyloid-beta plaqueremoval for over three decades, producing no curative therapy despite billions of dollars ofinvestment. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer disease (AD) is no longer viewed only as a clinical syndrome of memory impairment but as a biological disease continuum driven by interacting amyloid-β, tau, glial, vascular, metabolic, and synaptic mechanisms. 5 key findings →
A doença de Alzheimer (DA) representa a principal causa de demência no mundo, caracterizando-se por um processo neurodegenerativo progressivo associado ao comprometimento cognitivo e funcional. 5 key findings →
This study aims to comprehensively review the role of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) as a marker of astrocyte activation in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Revista de neurologia·2014-04-01
The new diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) include brain imaging and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers, with the aim of increasing the certainty of whether a patient has an ongoing AD neuropathologic process or not. 4 key findings →
Tau protein and amyloid s (Abeta), two major components of neuropathology in Alzheimer disease (AD), have been applied for establishment of more useful biomarkers and therapeutic approaches. 4 key findings →
El desarrollo de biomarcadores plasmáticos ha revolucionado el diagnóstico biológico de la enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA), al permitir una detección más temprana y menos invasiva de los procesos neuropatológicos subyacentes. 5 key findings →
Objetivo: Objetivou-se sintetizar, em revisão narrativa, as evidências publicadas entre 2022–2025 sobre o potencial neuroprotetor dos análogos do GLP-1 na Doença de Alzheimer (DA). 5 key findings →
Las enfermedades neurodegenerativas representan un importante problema de salud pública debido a su creciente prevalencia y al carácter progresivo e irreversible del daño neuronal que producen. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Revista de Medicina·2025-05-08
Introdução: Com o aumento da expectativa de vida e do percentual de idosos no país, também está crescendo a taxa de doenças neurodegenerativas. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 26 out of 100.·Kranion·2025-08-22
ResumenLa enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA) es una enfermedad neurodegenerativa crónica que se caracteriza por la acumulación excesiva de proteína beta-amiloide y de proteína Tau fosforilada. 1 key finding →
A Doença de Alzheimer (DA) é uma enfermidade neurodegenerativa progressiva cuja detecção precoce é essencial para intervenções terapêuticas eficazes. 5 key findings →
⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100.·medRxiv·2023-04-26
Recently-developed blood markers for Alzheimer’s (AD) detection have high accuracy but usually require ultra-sensitive analytic tools not commonly available in clinical laboratories. 4 key findings →
⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100.·medRxiv·2024-10-27
Blood-based biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have been widely studied, but direct comparisons of several biomarkers in clinical settings remain limited. 4 key findings →
10 of the 3,555 studies in this tag that have a study page, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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 tierup to 10 pts
Journal's citation recordup to 4 pts
Study designup to 12 pts
Strength of evidenceup to 5 pts
Peer-review validationup to 10 pts
How recentup to 5 pts
Sample sizeup to 4 pts
Effect reportedup to 3 pts
Studied in peopleup to 3 pts
Randomised / blindedup to 2 pts
Times citedup to 7 pts
Citations per yearup to 5 pts
Impact for its field and yearup to 6 pts
Cited by studies hereup to 6 pts
Still being citedup to 4 pts
Senior author's track recordup to 4 pts
Institution's track recordup to 3 pts
Multi-centre collaborationup to 3 pts
Indexed in PubMedup to 2 pts
Free to readup 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%),
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.
1,034 records (3.6% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 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.