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 48 out of 100. Tau biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

After correction for age, sex, and education, CSF tau levels were found to be negatively related to the Visual Association Test (standardized β = -0.3, P < .05), whereas CSF Aβ1-42 levels were found to be positively related to the Mini-Mental State Examination (β = 0.3, P < .05), the frontal assessment battery (β = 0.5, P < .05), and digit span backwards test (β = 0.3, P = .01). We did not find relations between CSF biomarkers and behavior (measured by the neuropsychiatric inventory). After excluding all patients with a CSF biomarker profile often seen in Alzheimer's disease (high levels of tau and low levels of Aβ1-42), we still found relations between CSF Aβ1-42 levels and Visual Association Test object naming (β = 0.4, P < .05), as well as between CSF Aβ1-42 levels and the frontal assessment battery (β = 0.5, P < .05, but there was no relation between CSF tau and cognition. Low CSF Aβ1-42 levels are associated with worse general cognitive function and worse executive function in patients with bvFTD. Our results provide circumstantial evidence for a pathophysiological role of Aβ1-42 in bvFTD.

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

APA 7th

Koedam, E. L. G. E., van der Vlies, A. E., van der Flier, W. M., Verwey, N. A., Koene, T., Scheltens, P., et al. (2013). Cognitive correlates of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2011.12.007

Vancouver

Koedam ELGE, van der Vlies AE, van der Flier WM, Verwey NA, Koene T, Scheltens P, et al. Cognitive correlates of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2011.12.007. PMID: 22846628.

BibTeX

@article{koedam2013-22846628,
  author  = {Koedam, Esther L G E and van der Vlies, Annelies E and van der Flier, Wiesje M and Verwey, Nicolaas A and Koene, Ted and Scheltens, Philip and Blankenstein, Marinus A and Pijnenburg, Yolande A L},
  title   = {{Cognitive correlates of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
  year    = {2013},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.jalz.2011.12.007},
  pmid    = {22846628},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2011.12.007}
}

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 names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 48/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomized / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multicenter collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 27 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 48 of 100. Total 48 of 100.27 of the 56 points we could judge = 48 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record, multicenter collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 48 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association)
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 2013 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 58 participants
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded 0 / 2 No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
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 — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 22846628)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 27 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 48 out of 100.
Total 48 / 100 —

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

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Tau biomarkers

Also in Tau biomarkers

64 studies in the library are filed under Tau biomarkers with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Tau biomarkers hub.

Similar studies

More on Tau biomarkers

See all studies in Tau biomarkers →