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.

Find studies

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

A single traumatic brain injury is associated with an increased risk of dementia and, in a proportion of patients surviving a year or more from injury, the development of hallmark Alzheimer's disease-like pathologies. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 52 Evidence: moderate

TDP-43 stage, mixed pathologies, and clinical Alzheimer's-type dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2016-11-01

We tested the hypotheses that TDP-43 with Alzheimer's disease pathology is a common mixed pathology; is related to increased likelihood of expressing clinical Alzheimer's-type dementia; and that TDP-43 pathologic stage is an important determinant of clinical Alzheimer's-type dementia. 5 key findings →

Participants: 398 Evidence: moderate

Exome sequencing reveals VCP mutations as a cause of familial ALS

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Neuron 2010-12-01

Using exome sequencing, we identified a p.R191Q amino acid change in the valosin-containing protein (VCP) gene in an Italian family with autosomal dominantly inherited amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Lewy body diseases (LBD), e.g., Parkinson's disease (PD) dementia and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), are common causes of geriatric cognitive impairments. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 389 Evidence: moderate

The pathology-based classification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative diseases is a work in progress that is important for both clinicians and basic scientists. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Alpha-synuclein cortical Lewy bodies correlate with dementia in Parkinson's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neurology 2000-05-01

CLBs detected by alpha-synuclein antibodies in patients with PD are a more sensitive and specific correlate of dementia than the presence of Alzheimer's pathology, which was present in a minority of the cases in this series. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The INNOTEST and INNO-BIA CSF platforms perform equally well in identifying individuals with underlying amyloid plaque pathology. 2 key findings →

Participants: 103 Evidence: moderate

Exogenous α-synuclein fibrils induce Lewy body pathology leading to synaptic dysfunction and neuron death

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neuron 2011-10-01

Inclusions composed of α-synuclein (α-syn), i.e., Lewy bodies (LBs) and Lewy neurites (LNs), define synucleinopathies including Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Longitudinal change in CSF Tau and Aβ biomarkers for up to 48 months in ADNI

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2013-06-29

The dynamics of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tau and Aβ biomarkers over time in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients from prodromal pre-symptomatic to severe stages of dementia have not been clearly defined and recent studies, most of which are cross-sectional, present conflicting findings. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

Pathological tau aggregates in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration-tau (FTLD-tau) adopt distinct conformations differentiated by the AD-tau specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) GT-38 that are not readily visualized using phosphorylation-specific anti-tau mAbs. 2 key findings →

Participants: 49 Evidence: moderate

TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) is the disease protein in frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions (FTLD-U) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most prevalent age-related neurodegenerative disorder, is characterized pathologically by the accumulation of beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques and tau-laden neurofibrillary tangles. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Tauopathies, including Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration with tau pathologies, are neurodegenerative diseases characterized by neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) comprising filamentous tau protein. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: defining phenotypic diversity through personalized medicine

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2014-12-31

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) comprises two main classes of neurodegenerative diseases characterized by neuronal/glial proteinaceous inclusions (i.e., proteinopathies) including tauopathies (i.e., FTLD-Tau) and TDP-43 proteinopathies (i.e., FTLD-TDP) while other very rare forms of FTLD are known such as FTLD with FUS pathology (FTLD-FUS). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The disease protein in frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions (FTLD-U) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) was identified recently as the TDP-43 (TAR DNA-binding protein 43), thereby providing a molecular link between these two disorders. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Filamentous tau aggregates are hallmarks of tauopathies, e.g., frontotemporal dementia with parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17 (FTDP-17) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/parkinsonism-dementia complex (ALS/PDC). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid and positron emission tomography biomarkers accurately predict an underlying Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology; however, they represent either invasive or expensive diagnostic tools. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

TAR DNA-binding protein 43 in neurodegenerative disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2010-03-16

In 2006, TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43), a highly conserved nuclear protein, was identified as the major disease protein in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and in the most common variant of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), FTLD-U, which is characterized by cytoplasmic inclusions that stain positive for ubiquitin but negative for tau and alpha-synuclein. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) increases susceptibility to Alzheimer's disease (AD), but it is not known how TBI contributes to the onset or progression of this common late life dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled. Show only studies that are free to read

How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped

This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor, and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself, so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.

  • Journal tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up to 2 pts

Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science, Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the tier-3 journals apart.

Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.

We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.

The score is computed from the published data alone and is reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.

See the whole rubric drawn out → — four charts covering all 31,380 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.

What this library is — and isn't

This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here, that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.

1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 of those are preprints posted before any journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a peer-reviewed article.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed    Where this research is being discussed: events