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 36 out of 100. Getting a diagnosis

Topic: Disease mechanisms in lab and animal studies

The historical roots of Alzheimer's disease provide a sound conceptual basis for linking the behavioral and neurological symptoms of the disease with the frequently associated pathology of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. Out of these roots has grown the "amyloid cascade hypothesis"--a vision of the etiology of Alzheimer's that has spurred the discovery of many important insights into the neurobiology of the disease. Despite these successes, the wealth of new data now available to biomedical researchers urges a full review of the origins of Alzheimer's, and such a reconsideration is offered here. It begins with the most widely accepted risk factor for developing Alzheimer's disease: age. Then, for an individual to progress from normal age-appropriate cognitive function to a condition where the full palette of clinical symptoms is expressed, three key steps are envisioned: (1) an initiating injury, (2) a chronic neuroinflammatory response, and (3) a discontinuous cellular change of state involving most, if not all, of the cell types of the brain. The amyloid cascade is integrated into this sequence, but reconfigured as an amyloid deposition cycle. In this way, the pathology of amyloid plaques is envisioned as highly correlated with, but mechanistically distinct from, the three obligatory steps leading to Alzheimer's disease. The implications of this new model are discussed with respect to our current diagnostic criteria, and suggestions are put forward for expanding our future research efforts.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 36/100
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 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 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 left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 21 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 36 of 100. Total 36 of 100.21 of the 58 points we could judge = 36 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people 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 multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience)
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 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 0 / 3 Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
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 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 21159946)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 21 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100.
Total 36 / 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.

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. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Herrup, K. (2010). Reimagining Alzheimer's disease--an age-based hypothesis. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4521-10.2010

Vancouver

Herrup K. Reimagining Alzheimer's disease--an age-based hypothesis. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2010. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.4521-10.2010. PMID: 21159946.

BibTeX

@article{herrup2010-21159946,
  author  = {Herrup, K.},
  title   = {{Reimagining Alzheimer's disease--an age-based hypothesis}},
  journal = {The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience},
  year    = {2010},
  doi     = {10.1523/jneurosci.4521-10.2010},
  pmid    = {21159946},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.4521-10.2010}
}

Related studies in Getting a diagnosis

Also tagged “presenilin”

343 studies in the library carry the topic tag “presenilin”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 343 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Getting a diagnosis

See all studies in Getting a diagnosis →