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.

67/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100. Biomarkers

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Across the brain, people with Down syndrome had greater concentrations of tau for a given level of amyloid compared with people with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease. Temporally, increases in tau were more strongly associated with increases in amyloid for people with Down syndrome compared with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease. Interpretation Although the general progression of amyloid followed by tau is similar for people Down syndrome and people with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease, we found subtle differences in the spatial distribution, timing, and magnitude of the tau burden between these two cohorts.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: Moderate

This is a follow-up (cohort) study of 137 participants. Comparing people with Down syndrome and people with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease, those with Down syndrome had greater tau concentrations for a given amyloid level, and tau increases were more strongly associated with amyloid increases. The general progression of amyloid followed by tau was similar in both groups, but there were subtle differences in the spatial distribution, timing, and magnitude of tau burden.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

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

APA 7th

Wisch, J. K., McKay, N. S., Boerwinkle, A. H., Kennedy, J., Flores, S., Handen, B. L., et al. (2024). Comparison of tau spread in people with Down syndrome versus autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study. The Lancet. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00084-x

Vancouver

Wisch JK, McKay NS, Boerwinkle AH, Kennedy J, Flores S, Handen BL, et al. Comparison of tau spread in people with Down syndrome versus autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study. The Lancet. Neurology. 2024. doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00084-x. PMID: 38631766.

BibTeX

@article{wisch2024-38631766,
  author  = {Wisch, J. K. and McKay, N. S. and Boerwinkle, A. H. and Kennedy, J. and Flores, S. and Handen, B. L. and Christian, B. T. and Head, E. and others},
  title   = {{Comparison of tau spread in people with Down syndrome versus autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study}},
  journal = {The Lancet. Neurology},
  year    = {2024},
  doi     = {10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00084-x},
  pmid    = {38631766},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/s1474-4422(24)00084-x}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record lists 137 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Across the brain, people with Down syndrome had greater concentrations of tau for a given level of amyloid compared with people with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease.
Temporally, increases in tau were more strongly associated with increases in amyloid for people with Down syndrome compared with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease.
Interpretation Although the general progression of amyloid followed by tau is similar for people Down syndrome and people with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease, we found subtle differences in the spatial distribution, timing, and magnitude of the tau burden between these two cohorts.

Why it matters

Comparing people with Down syndrome and people with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease, those with Down syndrome had greater tau concentrations for a given amyloid level, and tau increases were more strongly associated with amyloid increases. The general progression of amyloid followed by tau was similar in both groups, but there were subtle differences in the spatial distribution, timing, and magnitude of tau burden.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →

Study details

Study designcohort study
Participants137
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 67/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (The Lancet. Neurology)
Journal's citation record	3 / 4	The Lancet Neurology: journal h-index 457 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	7 / 12	A cohort study following people over time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	4 / 5	2024 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	2 / 4	137 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	3 / 7	Cited 37 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	3 / 5	9.2 citations a year over 4 year(s) since 2024
Impact for its field and year	4 / 6	Cited 8.8× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 4 other studies in this library
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 37 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	4 / 4	Last-listed author Randall John Bateman: h-index 101 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	3 / 3	University of Washington: institution h-index 3,540 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	3 / 3	OpenAlex lists 23 institution(s) in 5 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 38631766)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	67 / 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).

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

Studies this one cites

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

Later studies that cite this one

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

Related studies in Biomarkers from nearby years

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.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Biomarkers

See all studies in Biomarkers →