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 2,101–2,125 of 2,594 studies in Biomarkers(page 85 of 104)· 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.
What “Biomarkers” covers
Biomarkers — Measurable signals in blood, brain scans or spinal fluid that can indicate Alzheimer's changes.
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.
Participants’ motivations for testing and long-term adaptation to the results were strongly shaped by cognitive concerns and personal experiences of dementia in relatives. 5 key findings →
The feasibility of assaying plasma phosphorylated tau protein (threonine 181), denoted p-tau181, using immunomagnetic reduction (IMR) is explored. 3 key findings →
Accumulating data from the clinical research support that the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers amyloid-β (Aβ42), total tau (T-tau), and phosphorylated tau (P-tau) reflect key elements of AD pathophysiology. 3 key findings →
Cognitive decline and memory impairment induced by oxidative brain damage are the critical pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Brain research·2018-04-03
Adipose-derived stem cells (ADSC) have a therapeutic potential for the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Multiplex immunoassay conducted on brain lysates showed that alcohol drinking upregulated primary markers of AD pathology in 3xTg-AD mice: Aβ 42/40 ratio in the lateral entorhinal and prefrontal cortex and total Tau expression in the lateral entorhinal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and amygdala at 1-month post alcohol exposure. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative pathology characterized by aggregates of amyloid-β (Aβ) and phosphorylated tau protein, synaptic dysfunction, and spatial memory impairment. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Nanoscale·2018-04-01
Monitoring the ratio of 40- and 42-residue amyloid β peptides (i.e., Aβ40 and Aβ42) in human plasma is considered one of the hallmarks of detection of the early stage of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) may affect in excess of 90% of individuals with Down syndrome (DS) after age 60, due to duplication of the APP gene in trisomy of chromosome 21, with neuropathology that is comparable to Sporadic AD and Familial AD (FAD). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·EMBO reports·2017-07-12
Little is known about the extent to which pathogenic factors drive the development of Alzheimer's disease (AD) at different stages of the long preclinical and clinical phases. 3 key findings →
The past five years have seen an enormous development in the field of fluid biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related disorders. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·ACS sensors·2019-02-22
Blood-based diagnosis (hemodiagnosis) of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is emerging as a promising alternative to cerebrospinal-fluid-based methods because blood contains various kinds of AD biomarkers, including amyloid beta 1-40, 1-42, and τ (tau) protein. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·ACS sensors·2020-04-02
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative condition that affects a large number of elderly people worldwide and has a high social and economic impact. 2 key findings →
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) of the amyloid-beta (Abeta) type is the most common form of sporadic CAA and is now also accepted as an early and integral part of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. 2 key findings →
The ratio of the longer (i.e., Aβ42/Aβ43) to shorter (i.e. Aβ40) species is a critical factor determining amyloid fibril formation, neurotoxicity and progression of the amyloid pathology in Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·2014-03-27
Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are widely prescribed for the medication of systemic hypertension and congestive heart failure. 3 key findings →
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) refers to the specific deposition of amyloid fibrils in the leptomeningeal and cerebral blood vessel walls, often causing secondary vascular degenerative changes. 3 key findings →
The recent paradigm shift towards a more biologically oriented definition of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in clinical settings increases the need for sensitive biomarkers that can be applied in population-based settings. 5 key findings →
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.