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 76–100 of 107 studies by Ashton NJ marked Peer-reviewed (page 4 of 5) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 107 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.

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.

We studied the promising Alzheimer biomarker plasma tau phosphorylated at threonine 231 (p-tau231) in a cohort of cardiac arrest patients who survived to intensive care to predict long-term neurological outcomes. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 425 Evidence: moderate

An update on blood-based biomarkers for non-Alzheimer neurodegenerative disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2020-04-22

Cerebrospinal fluid analyses and neuroimaging can identify the underlying pathophysiology at the earliest stage of some neurodegenerative disorders, but do not have the scalability needed for population screening. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Importantly, Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio remained unaltered, suggesting that it is more suitable for implementation in clinical workup than individual Aβ peptides. 4 key findings →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

In vitro and animal studies have suggested that inoculation with herpes simplex virus 1 (HSV-1) can lead to amyloid deposits, hyperphosphorylation of tau, and/or neuronal loss. 4 key findings →

Participants: 58 Evidence: low

Plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease in relation to neuropathology and cognitive change

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2022-02-23

Plasma biomarkers related to amyloid, tau, and neurodegeneration (ATN) show great promise for identifying these pathological features of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) as shown by recent clinical studies and selected autopsy studies. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

A combination of plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 and p-tau217 discriminated Aβ status with relatively high accuracy, whereas p-tau217 showed strongest associations with Aβ pathology in MCI but not in CU. 1 key finding →

Participants: 591 Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid p-tau231 as an early indicator of emerging pathology in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. EBioMedicine 2022-02-12

All CSF p-tau biomarkers were accurate predictors of cognitive impairment but CSF p-tau217 demonstrated the largest fold-changes in AD patients in comparison to non-AD dementias and cognitively unimpaired individuals. 3 key findings →

Participants: 171 Evidence: low

Increasingly, clinical trials for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are being conducted earlier in the disease phase and with biomarker confirmation using in vivo amyloid PET imaging or CSF tau and Aβ measures to quantify pathology. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Clinical trials testing tau-targeting therapies may benefit from using fluid biomarkers to recruit individuals at risk of tau aggregation. 1 key finding →

Participants: 163 Evidence: low

These results support plasma p-tau 181 for the detection of AD dementia and the use of blood-based biomarkers for optimal disease detection. 2 key findings →

Participants: 235 Evidence: low

Only increased serum NfL concentrations and decreased hippocampal volume was observed in cognitively unimpaired APOEε4 homozygotes compared to non-carriers. 5 key findings →

Participants: 19 Evidence: low

The validity of dementia diagnostic criteria depends on their ability to distinguish dementia symptoms from pre-existing cognitive impairments. 1 key finding →

Participants: 165 Evidence: low

Comparing clinical stages, CSF PDGFRβ levels were increased at the MCI stage (Cohen's d = 0.55 [CI 95% 0.066, 1.0], P = 0.025) compared with NC. 3 key findings →

Participants: 23 Evidence: low

It is unknown whether multidomain interventions, which might preserve late-life cognition, affect Alzheimer's disease pathology. 4 key findings →

Participants: 527 Evidence: high

Only Aβ burden measured by PET, but not markers of neuroinflammation, differed among cognitively unimpaired elderly with different APOE ε4 gene dose. 3 key findings →

Participants: 19 Evidence: low

We believe this is the first study to investigate associations between blood metabolites and neocortical amyloid burden (NAB) in the search for a blood-based biomarker for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 91 Evidence: moderate

We underline the potential of next-generation biomarker identification tools to detect novel proteomic features that also incorporate established biomarkers. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Concentrations of Aβ 40 and Aβ 42 were much higher in adults with DS than in other groups, reflecting APP gene triplication, while no difference in the Aβ 42 /Aβ 40 ratio between those with DS and sAD may indicate similar processing and deposition of Aβ 40 and Aβ 42 in these groups. 4 key findings →

Participants: 31 Evidence: low

Salivary Biomarkers for Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Neurology and therapy 2019-12-12

The search for accessible and cost-effective biomarkers to complement current cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and imaging biomarkers in the accurate detection of Alzheimer disease (AD) and other common neurodegenerative disorders remains a challenging task. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Understanding how plasma tau biomarkers are influenced by co-pathologies and comorbidities is crucial for their accurate implementation. 3 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

↑ 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 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