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 51 out of 100. Tau biomarkers

Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers

Patients with all biomarkers positive for AD (N = 145) had the highest hazard for progression to dementia due to AD, whilst patients with no positive biomarkers (N = 111) had the lowest. The risk of patients with only abnormal p-Tau and/or t-Tau (N = 49) or with positive Aβ42 in combination with positive t-Tau or p-Tau (N = 119) is significantly lower than that of patients with all biomarkers positive. The risk of progression to dementia due to AD differs between patients with different CSF biomarker constellations.

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

APA 7th

Alexopoulos, P., Werle, L., Roesler, J., Thierjung, N., Gleixner, L. S., Yakushev, I., et al. (2016). Conflicting cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and progression to dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's research & therapy. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-016-0220-z

Vancouver

Alexopoulos P, Werle L, Roesler J, Thierjung N, Gleixner LS, Yakushev I, et al. Conflicting cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and progression to dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimer's research & therapy. 2016. doi:10.1186/s13195-016-0220-z. PMID: 27931251.

BibTeX

@article{alexopoulos2016-27931251,
  author  = {Alexopoulos, Panagiotis and Werle, Lukas and Roesler, Jennifer and Thierjung, Nathalie and Gleixner, Lena Sophie and Yakushev, Igor and Laskaris, Nikolaos and Wagenpfeil, Stefan and others},
  title   = {{Conflicting cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers and progression to dementia due to Alzheimer's disease}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's research \& therapy},
  year    = {2016},
  doi     = {10.1186/s13195-016-0220-z},
  pmid    = {27931251},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1186/s13195-016-0220-z}
}

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.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 51/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / 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; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 30 of the 59 points it could be judged on, which is 51 of 100. Total 51 of 100.30 of the 59 points we could judge = 51 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomised / 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 and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 59 points we could judge it on, which is 51 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer's research & therapy)
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 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 1 / 5 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 2 / 4 145 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)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation 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
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27931251)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 30 / 59 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 59 points we could judge it on is 51 out of 100.
Total 51 / 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 tagged “neurofilament”

693 studies in the library carry the topic tag “neurofilament”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 693 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Tau biomarkers

See all studies in Tau biomarkers →