Home › Research › Treatments
Real-World Performance of Urine β-amyloid Test Kits in Multiple Hospital Clinics and Neighborhood Communities of China
Qiao L, Wang G, Chen X, Wang J, Huang W, Xing D, Zhao Q, Wang Y et al.. medRxiv, 2026-05-15
Topic: Plasma and spinal-fluid biomarkers
Background Growing evidence suggests that urinary β-amyloid precursor protein (AβPP) fragments can serve as an early screening biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia. Results The kit showed a significant age-dependent positive rate in both men and women in Changsha, increasing from 6.29% to 15.40%. The number of weakly positive/positive/negative individuals in the healthy group, non-AD group, and MCI/AD group were 8/12/246 (positive rate 7.52%), 41/16/409 (12.23%), and 77/44/46 (72.46%), respectively, with a Kappa value of 0.669, indicating that the method performed well in the clinical diagnosis of MCI/AD, consistent with previously published results. Comorbidity analysis showed that memory decline was the most significantly associated risk factor (P=9.6×10 □ 23 , Fisher’s exact test), followed by hyperlipidemia (P=3.2×10 □ 12 ), history of stroke (P=0.0011), and hypertension (P=0.0058). Treatment analysis showed that cardiovascular drugs and antithrombotic drugs significantly reduced the risk association with dementia (P values were 0.0061 and 0.0081, respectively), followed by hypoglycemic drugs (P=0.0358). Conclusion Our findings confirm the diagnostic value of urinary β-amyloid protein detection in MCI and AD-related dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Qiao, L., Wang, G., Chen, X., Wang, J., Huang, W., Xing, D., et al. (2026). Real-World Performance of Urine β-amyloid Test Kits in Multiple Hospital Clinics and Neighborhood Communities of China. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.05.06.26348372
Vancouver
Qiao L, Wang G, Chen X, Wang J, Huang W, Xing D, et al. Real-World Performance of Urine β-amyloid Test Kits in Multiple Hospital Clinics and Neighborhood Communities of China. medRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.05.06.26348372.
BibTeX
@article{qiao2026-266072a1,
author = {Qiao, L. and Wang, G. and Chen, X. and Wang, J. and Huang, W. and Xing, D. and Zhao, Q. and Wang, Y. and others},
title = {{Real-World Performance of Urine β-amyloid Test Kits in Multiple Hospital Clinics and Neighborhood Communities of China}},
journal = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.05.06.26348372},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.05.06.26348372}
}
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
- Background Growing evidence suggests that urinary β-amyloid precursor protein (AβPP) fragments can serve as an early screening biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia.
- Results The kit showed a significant age-dependent positive rate in both men and women in Changsha, increasing from 6.29% to 15.40%.
- The number of weakly positive/positive/negative individuals in the healthy group, non-AD group, and MCI/AD group were 8/12/246 (positive rate 7.52%), 41/16/409 (12.23%), and 77/44/46 (72.46%), respectively, with a Kappa value of 0.669, indicating that the method performed well in the clinical diagnosis of MCI/AD, consistent with previously published results.
- Comorbidity analysis showed that memory decline was the most significantly associated risk factor (P=9.6×10 □ 23 , Fisher’s exact test), followed by hyperlipidemia (P=3.2×10 □ 12 ), history of stroke (P=0.0011), and hypertension (P=0.0058).
- Treatment analysis showed that cardiovascular drugs and antithrombotic drugs significantly reduced the risk association with dementia (P values were 0.0061 and 0.0081, respectively), followed by hypoglycemic drugs (P=0.0358).
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designcase-control study
- Participants51,187
- Effect size6.29% to 15.40%; 7.52%; 12.23%
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 52 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 32 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (medRxiv) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 6 / 12 | A case-control study |
| Strength of evidence | 5 / 5 | Rated “high” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 4 / 4 | 51,187 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 | — / 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 | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 32 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 32 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
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.
Related studies in Treatments
Also tagged “neurofilament”
697 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 697 tagged studies.