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 4,951–4,975 of 7,821 studies · tagged Brain Biology (page 199 of 313) · 28,980 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.

Correlates of hippocampal neuron number in Alzheimer's disease and ischemic vascular dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2005-06-01

The cornu ammonis 1 region of the hippocampus (CA1) sector of hippocampus is vulnerable to both Alzheimer's disease (AD)-type neurofibrillary degeneration and anoxia-ischemia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Early outcome measures of experimental traumatic brain injury (TBI) are useful for characterizing the traumatic severity as well as for clarifying the pathomechanisms underlying patterns of neuronal vulnerability. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

High-resolution magnetic resonance microscopy (MRM) was used to determine regional brain volumetric changes in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neurogenesis in the hippocampus occurs throughout life in a wide range of species and could be associated with hippocampus-dependent learning and memory. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Delusional misidentification and hallucinations in the early stages of dementia may improve differentiation between patients with dementia with Lewy bodies and those with Alzheimer's disease and have important treatment implications. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Our data provide an atlas of immunological alterations that can lead to improved diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for HFpEF. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

CSF biomarkers cutoffs: the importance of coincident neuropathological diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2012-04-22

The effects of applying clinical versus neuropathological diagnosis and the inclusion of cases with coincident neuropathological diagnoses have not been assessed specifically when studying cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker classification cutoffs for patients with neurodegenerative diseases that cause dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Further studies will refine this model and enable the use of biomarkers studied in ADNI clinically and in disease-modifying therapeutic trials. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Impaired adult neurogenesis in the dentate gyrus of a triple transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. PloS one 2008-08-13

However, male 3xTg-AD mice demonstrated a further reduction in the production of new neurones from 9 months of age (73% decrease) and a complete depletion at 12 months, when compared to controls. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

1. beta-Amyloid peptide (A beta), a 39 -- 43 amino acid peptide, is believed to induce oxidative stress and inflammation in the brain, which are postulated to play important roles in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Retinal pathology in Alzheimer's disease. II. Regional neuron loss and glial changes in GCL

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 1996-05-01

Detailed analyses of neuronal and astrocyte cell numbers in the ganglion cell layer (GCL) of whole-mounted peripheral retinas from 16 Alzheimer's disease (AD) and 11 control eyes (11 and 9 cases, respectively) demonstrate extensive neuronal loss throughout the entire retina in AD as compared to control eyes. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

We have shown that chronically administered cannabinoid showed marked beneficial effects concomitant with inflammation reduction and increased Aβ clearance. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Luteolin is a flavonoid in a variety of fruits, vegetables, and herbs, which has shown anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anti-cancer neuroprotective activities. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Twelve months after infection, a time equivalent to middle to early elderly ages, mice had behavioral and neurological deficits, and brain MRIs showed mild to moderate ventricular dilatation. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

An early substantial loss of basal forebrain cholinergic neurons (BFCNs) is a constant feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and is associated with deficits in spatial learning and memory. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 7,799 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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%), 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.

1,038 records (3.6% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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