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

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.

Cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) are hypothesised to have an important yet unknown role in the dementia disease pathology. 4 key findings →

Participants: 1,039 Evidence: moderate

Cerebrospinal fluid proteomics identification of biomarkers for amyloid and tau PET stages

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Cell reports. Medicine 2025-03-20

Accurate staging of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology is crucial for therapeutic trials and prognosis, but existing fluid biomarkers lack specificity, especially for assessing tau deposition severity, in amyloid-beta (Aβ)-positive patients. 2 key findings →

Participants: 136 Evidence: low

P‐tau181 in CSF and plasma predicted tau accumulation (r > 0.36, P < .001), even in AD‐continuum individuals with normal baseline tau‐PET (A+T–; r > 0.37, P < .05). 4 key findings →

Participants: 163 Evidence: low

Plasma pTau217 and pTau181 both correlate with AD, but the fold change in pTau217 makes it better to diagnose cerebral amyloidosis, and predict cognitive decline and conversion to AD dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a potential diagnostic and prognostic plasma biomarker for numerous neurological diseases including Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 350 Evidence: low

Patients with all biomarkers positive for AD (N = 145) had the highest hazard for progression to dementia due to AD, whilst patients with no positive biomarkers (N = 111) had the lowest. 3 key findings →

Participants: 145 Evidence: moderate

Patients were diagnosed with AD (n = 148, 73.2%), mixed dementia (n = 38, 18.8%), CJD, vascular dementia (n = 4, 2.0% for each), Lewy body dementia, and frontotemporal dementia (n = 3, 1.5% for each). 5 key findings →

Participants: 202 Evidence: low

Our objective was to evaluate the CSF phospho-Tau181/total-Tau (p/t-Tau) ratio to distinguish between the two main forms of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD): FTLD with TDP-43 (FTLD-TDP) and FTLD with Tau inclusions (FTLD-Tau). 2 key findings →

Participants: 39 Evidence: moderate

Cerebrospinal fluid and positron emission tomography biomarkers accurately predict an underlying Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology; however, they represent either invasive or expensive diagnostic tools. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

The forms of tau in CSF and plasma are distinct, but in each specimen type, the levels of certain fragments are increased in AD. 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

Robust and accessible biomarkers that can capture the heterogeneity of Alzheimer's disease and its diverse pathological processes are urgently needed. 2 key findings →

Participants: 18 Evidence: low

Plasma p-tau217 was accurate for discriminating between Core1+ and Core1- patients (area under the curve = 0.92) with an optimal cut-off value of 0.274 pg/mL, revealing good accuracy (86.29%), positive predictive value (PPV; 88.18%), and negative predictive value (NPV; 83.09%). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

p-Tau217 levels were highest in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, whereas NfL levels were highest in patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

On NULISA, phosphorylated tau (p-tau217, p-tau231, and p-tau181), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT-tau) showed the top significant association with amyloid beta (Aβ) positron emission tomography (PET) status, followed by the neuroinflammation markers C-C motif ligand 2 (CCL2), chitotriosidase 1 (CHIT1) and interleukin-8 (CXCL8), and the synaptic marker neurogranin (NRGN). 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Worse overall and local LC-EC integrity, indicated by lower fractional anisotropy (FA) and higher mean diffusivity (MD), was related to elevated concentrations of plasma phosphorylated tau 181 (p-tau181), p-tau217, and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

After the median time of incident TBI, Aβ42/Aβ40 levels remained lower for 9.3 years, and pTau181, NfL, and GFAP remained elevated for 8.5, >13.8, and 12.7 years, respectively. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

There has been a rapid growth in research on peripheral fluid biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD-related dementias, because they are non-invasive, relatively inexpensive and easily accessible. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Abnormal levels of plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) were found at the prodromal stage of MCI-LB in association with increased amyloid PET. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

From across this tag

10 of the 727 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.

↑ 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
  • Randomised / 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
  • Multi-centre 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 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.

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

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed