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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 326–350 of 3,336 studies · tagged Biomarkers(page 14 of 134)· 28,180 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; 13,658 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.
Cross-sectionally, CSF sTREM2, YKL-40, clusterin and fractalkine were higher only in groups with tau pathology, independent of amyloidosis (p < 0.001, A+/T+ or N+ and A-/T+ or N+, compared to A-/T-/N-). 5 key findings →
Despite the limited longitudinal data at the individual level and the high variability observed in such data, the study elucidates the link between the long asynchronous pathophysiological processes and the preclinical and clinical stages of AD. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.·Cells·2024-06-22
This prospective cohort study revealed that plasma NFL may predict longitudinal declines in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores. 5 key findings →
We found low intra-individual variability, robust to various factors, appropriate to capture individual changes in AD BBMs, while moderate inter-individual variability may give rise to caution in diagnostic contexts. 2 key findings →
The recent development of ultrasensitive technology allows the determination of blood-based biomarkers with high sensitivity, thus facilitating the early detection of AD through the analysis of easily obtained biological samples. 3 key findings →
We found MTL neurodegeneration largely consistent with existing models, suggesting that harmonized MRI volumetry may be used under conditions that are common in clinical multi-center cohorts. 5 key findings →
These data suggest that apoJ may have potential in the context of use (COU) of AD diagnostics, I-309 may be specifically useful in the COU of identifying individuals at greatest risk for progressing toward AD. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.·BMJ open·2016-07-19
In conjunction with the NILVAD trial, a European Multicentre Double-Blind Placebo Controlled trial of Nilvadipine in Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD), there are four NILVAD substudies in which eligible NILVAD patients are also invited to participate. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·Nature Medicine·2019-02
This study showed that a simple blood test measuring neurofilament light (NfL), a protein released when brain cells are damaged, can detect the earliest signs of brain degeneration in people carrying genes that cause early-onset familial Alzheimer's disease - years before any symptoms appear. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·Neurology·2025-10-28
Biomarkers were measured in 431 Black and 583 White participants (mean age of 77 and 80 years and 17% and 21% of men, respectively), generating a balanced sample of 366:366. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2020-09-29
Higher concentrations of serum biomarkers were associated with the development of clinical AD; especially, the time-specific associations were notable: t-tau 8 to 16 years, and Nf-L and GFAP 4 to 8 years prior to clinical AD. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2015-09-01
Within-person changes in CSF biomarkers were also compared with changes in cortical PiB binding and progression to a CDR higher than 0 at follow-up. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·Neurology·2009-01-01
This double-blind randomized controlled trial of vitamin therapy demonstrates a strong correlation between serum tHcy and plasma Abeta40 concentrations in subjects with ischemic stroke. 4 key findings →
Increasing evidence indicates that physical activity and exercise training may delay or prevent the onset of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease is a common and devastating disease for which there is no readily available biomarker to aid diagnosis or to monitor disease progression. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2021-03-01
Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that patients with IRBD who were α-synuclein negative had lower risk for developing Parkinson's disease or dementia with Lewy bodies at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 years of follow-up than patients with IRBD who were α-synuclein positive (log-rank test p=0·028; hazard ratio 0·143, 95% CI 0·019-1·063). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·Neurology·2016-01-29
An optimized immunoassay was used to analyze CSF Ng in a retrospective cohort of 331 participants with different neurodegenerative diseases, including healthy controls (n = 19), biomarker-proven Alzheimer disease (AD) (n = 100), genetic AD (n = 2), behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (n = 20), speech variant frontotemporal dementia (n = 21), Lewy body dementia (n = 13), Parkinson disease (n = 31), progressive supranuclear palsy (n = 46), multiple system atrophy (n = 29), as well as a heterogeneous group with non-neurodegenerative cognitive impairment (n = 50). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2019-02-13
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative condition marked by a decline in cognitive functions with no validated disease modifying treatment. 1 key finding →
This fifteen-year study provides a large database of highly characterized individuals with longitudinal cognitive, imaging and lifestyle data and biofluid collections, to aid in the development of interventions to delay onset, prevent or treat AD. 1 key finding →
10 of the 3,322 studies in this tag, 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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 (3.7% 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.