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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Objective To determine the frequency of high-convexity tight sulci (HCTS) in a population-based sample and whether the presence of HCTS and related features influenced participants' cognitive status and classification within the new Alzheimer-biomarker framework. Methods We analyzed 684 participants ≥50 years of age who were enrolled in the prospective population-based Mayo Clinic Study of Aging and underwent structural MRI, amyloid PET imaging, and tau PET imaging. A fully automated machine-learning algorithm that had been developed previously in house was used to detect neuroimaging features of HCTS. On the basis of PET and MRI measures, participants were classified as having normal (A - ) or abnormal (A + ) amyloid, normal (T - ) or abnormal (T + ) tau, and normal (N - ) or abnormal (N + ) neurodegeneration. The neuropsychological battery assessed domain-specific and global cognitive scores. Gait speed also was assessed. Analyses were adjusted for age and sex. Results Of 684 participants, 45 (6.6%) were classified with HCTS according to the automated algorithm. Patients with HCTS were older than patients without HCTS (mean [SD] 78.0 [8.3] vs 71.9 [10.8] years; p p = 0.005). Amyloid PET status was similar with and without HCTS, but tau PET standard uptake value ratio (SUVR) was lower for those with HCTS after age and sex adjustment ( p - (N) + group, regardless of amyloid status. Conclusion The HCTS pattern represents a definable subgroup of non-AD pathophysiology (i.e., T - [N] + ) that is associated with cognitive impairment. HCTS may confound clinical and biomarker interpretation in AD clinical trials.

Key findings

Why it matters

In 684 participants from a population-based study, 6.6% had a pattern of high-convexity tight sulci, which was associated with cognitive impairment and classified as a non-Alzheimer's pattern of neurodegeneration. This describes a subgroup of non-Alzheimer pathophysiology and does not test any treatment.

Study details

How this study scored 53/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record 4 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 3 of 7; Citations per year 2 of 5; Impact for its field and year 2 of 6; Cited by studies here 2 of 6; Still being cited 2 of 4; Senior author's track record 4 of 4; Institution's track record 2 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. Total 53 of 100.53 of 100 points earned47 not earned

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Neurology)
Journal's citation record 4 / 4 Neurology: journal h-index 525 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
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 2 / 5 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 684 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 3 / 7 Cited 35 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 2 / 5 3.9 citations a year over 9 year(s) since 2019
Impact for its field and year 2 / 6 Cited 2.8× 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 2 / 4 Cited 15 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record 4 / 4 Last-listed author Clifford R. Jack: h-index 203 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record 2 / 3 Mayo Clinic: institution h-index 1,606 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31719134)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total 53 / 100 —

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

Read the original

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. 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

Graff-Radford, J., Gunter, J. L., Jones, D. T., Przybelski, S. A., Schwarz, C. G., Huston, J., et al. (2019). Cerebrospinal fluid dynamics disorders: Relationship to Alzheimer biomarkers and cognition. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000008616

Vancouver

Graff-Radford J, Gunter JL, Jones DT, Przybelski SA, Schwarz CG, Huston J, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid dynamics disorders: Relationship to Alzheimer biomarkers and cognition. Neurology. 2019. doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000008616. PMID: 31719134.

BibTeX

@article{graffradford2019-31719134,
  author  = {Graff-Radford, J. and Gunter, J. L. and Jones, D. T. and Przybelski, S. A. and Schwarz, C. G. and Huston, J. and Lowe, V. and Elder, B. D. and others},
  title   = {{Cerebrospinal fluid dynamics disorders: Relationship to Alzheimer biomarkers and cognition}},
  journal = {Neurology},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.1212/wnl.0000000000008616},
  pmid    = {31719134},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000008616}
}

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 13.

Later studies that cite this one

3 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Biomarkers

Also tagged “biomarkers”

821 studies in the library carry the topic tag “biomarkers”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 821 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →