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

Showing 3,001–3,025 of 8,227 studies · tagged Brain Biology (page 121 of 330) · 29,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

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.

The APOE-npscore explained more variance and provided a better model fit for all three CSF measures than APOE ε4-carrier status and ε4 allele count. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The two most frequently examined biomarkers in the diagnosis of dementia are cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tau and beta-amyloid(1-42) (Abeta(1-42)). 4 key findings →

Participants: 23 Evidence: low

Tau protein concentrations were measured in the CSF of 23 patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT), 36 patients with multi-infarct dementia (MID), and 23 control subjects. 2 key findings →

Participants: 23 Evidence: low

APOE2 Exacerbates TDP-43 Related Toxicity in the Absence of Alzheimer Pathology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2023-01-10

We found that TDP-43 overexpression induced motor function deficits, neuronal loss, and gliosis in the motor cortex, especially in APOE2 mice, with much milder or absent effects in APOE3, APOE4, or Apoe-KO mice. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

APOE4 is a strong genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease and Dementia with Lewy bodies; however, how its expression impacts pathogenic pathways in a human-relevant system is not clear. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified APOE2 allele as linked to exceptional longevity, with carriers exhibiting a reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Genetic variations in MS4A4A and MS4A6A Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) are linked to the regulation of cerebrospinal-fluid-soluble TREM2 levels and are associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk and progression. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Variants in the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 gene are linked with an increased risk of dementia, in particular the R47Hhet triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 variant is linked to late-onset Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The prevailing view frames microglia and macrophages as guardians against amyloid beta (Aβ) accumulation in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Familial Alzheimer's disease (FAD) is caused by autosomal dominant mutations in the PSEN1, PSEN2 or APP genes, giving rise to considerable clinical and pathological heterogeneity in FAD. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Single-cell analysis reveals inflammatory interactions driving macular degeneration

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Nature communications 2023-05-05

Due to commonalities in pathophysiology, age-related macular degeneration (AMD) represents a uniquely accessible model to investigate therapies for neurodegenerative diseases, leading us to examine whether pathways of disease progression are shared across neurodegenerative conditions. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

With the recent approval by the FDA of the first disease-modifying drug for Alzheimer's Disease (AD), personalized medicine will be increasingly important for appropriate management and counseling of patients with AD and those at risk. 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

The calibrated model predicts that endogenous plaque turnover is slow, with an estimated half-life of 2.75 years. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Synthesis and Bioevaluation of 2-Styrylquinoxaline Derivatives as Tau-PET Tracers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Molecular pharmaceutics 2023-10-18

This study focused on designing and evaluating Tau-PET tracers for noninvasive positron emission computed tomography (PET) imaging of neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs), a hallmark pathology of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The intersection of metabolic disease and neurodegeneration represents one of the most consequential frontiers in translational neuroscience. 3 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: low

The Alzheimer disease (AD) neuropathological hallmarks amyloid β (Aβ) and tau neurofibrillary (NF) pathology have been reported in the olfactory bulb (OB) in aging and in different neurodegenerative diseases, which coincides with frequently reported olfactory dysfunction in these conditions. 1 key finding →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: moderate

Sleep dysfunction has been identified in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease (AD); however, the role and mechanism of circadian rhythm dysfunction is less well understood. 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

From across this tag

10 of the 8,203 studies in this tag that have a study page, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.

↑ 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 29,780 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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%), 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.

1,037 records (3.5% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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