Memory loss has long been considered the defining hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease. But there is more to the disease than misplaced keys, forgotten names, and other memory lapses. Reducing Alzheimer’s to memory alone oversimplifies a disease that affects multiple aspects of thinking, behavior, and daily functioning.

Women account for almost two-thirds of people living with Alzheimer's disease. For years, the higher prevalence was largely attributed to the fact that women tend to live longer than men. But during a recent episode of The Progress Profile: Alzheimer's Research in Focus podcast, Phyllis Ferrell, DrPH, MBA, innovator, investor, and incubator for brain health and longevity, argued that explanation no longer tells the whole story.

Alzheimer’s disease has long been studied as a distinct condition with its own symptoms, progression, and treatment strategies. But researchers are increasingly looking beyond the diagnosis and asking bigger questions about the biology that drives neurodegeneration.

The blog recaps series one of The Progress Profile: Alzheimer’s Research in Focus, highlighting expert insights on digital tools, biomarkers, and lifestyle approaches shaping Alzheimer’s research and previews what's next for series 2.

What if your daily digital habits held clues to your cognitive health? Dr. Rhoda Au is uncovering how smartphones and wearables could provide continuous, real-world insights into the brain, changing how we understand and track Alzheimer’s disease.

In this blog, we share findings on where the greatest opportunities lie — and why planning earlier and partnering smarter are keys to stronger trial execution.

When Dr. Miia Kivipelto launched the Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability, better known as the FINGER trial, in 2009, the field of dementia prevention was much different.

What decades of research reveal about brain health, early detection, and the future of dementia care

What if one of the most overlooked proteins in the brain turned out to hold the key to understanding—and eventually treating — Alzheimer’s disease?

The growing number of clinical trials and increasing number of drugs in the pipeline are reasons for optimism in the quest for new treatments for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). At the same time, there are concerns that many of the clinical assessments used to evaluate cognition are no longer fit for purpose.

When used properly, COAs offer valuable insights into patients’ conditions, helping researchers track patients’ progress and assess a drug’s efficacy throughout clinical trials.

In testing and in research, you must have an effective and reliable way to measure change. While raw scores have typically been the go-to for this important role, Growth Scale Values (GSVs) are quickly becoming the preferred method.

Growth Scale Values (GSVs) have a long 50-year history within research. However, GSVs are only now gaining traction as an alternative and more precise way to measure outcomes in clinical trials.

Each year, Gatlinburg brings together numerous behavioral scientists from around the world to discuss their research and collaborations in related fields such as intellectual and developmental disabilities. 

Over the last ten years, the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-3), a leading developmental assessment for children ages 1–42 months, has been referenced as an endpoint in 145 clinical trials (Citeline, 2024).

Dr. Lynsey Psimas, Ph.D and Dr. Paul Williams PsyD attended CNS Summit 2023 and were fortunate to have the opportunity to present their poster, Precision Matters: An Analysis on How Various Scores Behave When Measuring Change Over Time; Factors That Inform Score Selection for the Best Results”.

Growth scale values (GSVs) have gained traction as a more precise option for measuring outcomes in clinical trials. Unlike raw scores and age equivalents, which lack precision to quantitatively measure developmental change, GSVs have distinct advantages for measuring change over time.