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.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Down syndrome and Alzheimer's

Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models

Since its first description in 1906 by Dr. Alois Alzheimer, Alzheimer’s disease (AD) has been the most common type of dementia. Initially thought to be caused by age-associated accumulation of plaques, in recent years, research has increasingly associated AD with lysosomal storage and metabolic disorders, and the explanation of its pathogenesis has shifted from amyloid and tau accumulation to oxidative stress and impaired lipid and glucose metabolism aggravated by hypoxic conditions.

Key findings

Why it matters

This study proposes short-lived Niemann-Pick type C disease mice with accelerated brain aging as a new mouse model for Alzheimer's disease and aging research. It is animal model work and reports no treatment, cure, or prevention in people.

Study details

How this study scored 16/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 2 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 4 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 0 of 5; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 0 of 4; Senior author's track record 2 of 4; Institution's track record 3 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 1 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 20 of the 94 points it could be judged on, which is 21 of 100. Raw total 21 of 100, shown as 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed research article.raw total 21 of 100capped at 16 — hatched points do not count

Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 21 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on impact for its field and year, so that was left out: it earned 20 of the 94 points we could judge it on, which is 21 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 2 / 10 Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (bioRxiv)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 4 / 10 Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server.
How recent 4 / 5 2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Laboratory or animal study (title names “mice”) — scores zero
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 1 / 7 Cited 2 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 0 / 5 0.5 citations a year over 4 year(s) since 2024
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 0 / 4 Cited 2 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 2 / 4 Last-listed author Alaattin Kaya: h-index 24 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 3 / 3 Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 OpenAlex lists 6 institution(s) in 2 countries
Indexed in PubMed 1 / 2 Not in PubMed, but has a DOI
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 20 / 94 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 20 of the 94 points we could judge it on is 21 out of 100.
Total 21 / 100 Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article.

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Gujjala, V. A., Klimek, I., Abyadeh, M., Tyshkovskiy, A., Oz, N., Castro, J. P., et al. (2024). A disease similarity approach identifies short-lived Niemann-Pick type C disease mice with accelerated brain aging as a novel mouse model for Alzheimer’s disease and aging research. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.19.590328

Vancouver

Gujjala VA, Klimek I, Abyadeh M, Tyshkovskiy A, Oz N, Castro JP, et al. A disease similarity approach identifies short-lived Niemann-Pick type C disease mice with accelerated brain aging as a novel mouse model for Alzheimer’s disease and aging research. bioRxiv. 2024. doi:10.1101/2024.04.19.590328.

BibTeX

@article{gujjala2024-77053260,
  author  = {Gujjala, V. A. and Klimek, I. and Abyadeh, M. and Tyshkovskiy, A. and Oz, N. and Castro, J. P. and Gladyshev, V. N. and Newton, J. and others},
  title   = {{A disease similarity approach identifies short-lived Niemann-Pick type C disease mice with accelerated brain aging as a novel mouse model for Alzheimer’s disease and aging research}},
  journal = {bioRxiv},
  year    = {2024},
  doi     = {10.1101/2024.04.19.590328},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.19.590328}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here.

Related studies in Down syndrome and Alzheimer's

Also tagged “down”

527 studies in the library carry the topic tag “down”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 527 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Down syndrome and Alzheimer's

See all studies in Down syndrome and Alzheimer's →