Home › Research › Biomarkers
Alzheimer Disease
Apostolova LG.. Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.), 2016-04-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Purpose of review This article discusses the recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD). Recent findings In recent years, significant advances have been made in the fields of genetics, neuroimaging, clinical diagnosis, and staging of AD. One of the most important recent advances in AD is our ability to visualize amyloid pathology in the living human brain. The newly revised criteria for diagnosis of AD dementia embrace the use for biomarkers as supportive evidence for the underlying pathology. Guidelines for the responsible use of amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) have been developed, and the clinical and economic implications of amyloid PET imaging are actively being explored. Summary Our improved understanding of the clinical onset, progression, neuroimaging, pathologic features, genetics, and other risk factors for AD impacts the approaches to clinical diagnosis and future therapeutic interventions.
Key findings
- Recent findings In recent years, significant advances have been made in the fields of genetics, neuroimaging, clinical diagnosis, and staging of AD.
Why it matters
This review covers recent advances in genetics, neuroimaging, clinical diagnosis and staging of Alzheimer disease, including the ability to visualize amyloid pathology in the living brain. It discusses diagnosis and future therapeutic interventions but reports no treatment, cure or prevention.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 40 of the 93 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.)) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 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 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 5 / 7 | Cited 198 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 3 / 5 | 16.5 citations a year over 12 year(s) since 2016 |
| Impact for its field and year | 3 / 6 | Cited 4.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 2 / 6 | Cited by 3 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 65 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Liana G. Apostolova: h-index 80 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27042902) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 40 / 93 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 93 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1212/con.0000000000000307
- PubMed: 27042902
- Original source →
- Free full text: PubMed Central →
Full text: free to read — PubMed Central lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).
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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Apostolova, L. G. (2016). Alzheimer Disease. Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.). https://doi.org/10.1212/con.0000000000000307
Vancouver
Apostolova LG. Alzheimer Disease. Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.). 2016. doi:10.1212/con.0000000000000307. PMID: 27042902.
BibTeX
@article{apostolova2016-27042902,
author = {Apostolova, L. G.},
title = {{Alzheimer Disease}},
journal = {Continuum (Minneapolis, Minn.)},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1212/con.0000000000000307},
pmid = {27042902},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1212/con.0000000000000307}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 34.
Later studies that cite this one
3 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.