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 1,826–1,850 of 2,900 studies · tagged Brain Scans (page 74 of 116) · 27,780 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.

Medial temporal lobe dependent cognitive functions are highly vulnerable to hypoxia in the hippocampal region, yet little is known about the relationship between the richness of hippocampal vascular supply and cognition. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Multi-modal imaging predicts memory performance in normal aging and cognitive decline

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2008-10-05

This study (n=161) related morphometric MR imaging, FDG-PET and APOE genotype to memory scores in normal controls (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Participants: 161 Evidence: low

Elevated glucocorticoid concentrations, decreased hippocampal volume and frontal atrophy with poor cognitive function have been reported in the elderly but not extensively in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Participants: 172 Evidence: low

These findings support evidence of genetic control of brain volume even in adults, particularly of hippocampal and neocortical volume and of cortical volumetric reductions being familial, but do not support measures of subcortical volumes per se as representing intermediate biologic phenotypes. 4 key findings →

Participants: 169 Evidence: low

Exercise training is an effective means for promoting white matter and hippocampal recovery and improving reaction time in children treated with cranial radiation for brain tumors. 3 key findings →

Participants: 16 Evidence: low

In 3T MRI visually inspected by experts, quantification of hippocampal volume and signal can increase the detection of hippocampal sclerosis in 28% of patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. 1 key finding →

Participants: 125 Evidence: low

A diffusion prepared 3D GRASE pCASL sequence with TGV regularized SPA modeling was proposed to measure BBB water permeability noninvasively with good reproducibility. k w may serve as an imaging marker of cerebral SVD and associated cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Including plasma p-tau217/np-tau217 along with Aβ42/Aβ40 in predictive algorithms may streamline screening preclinical individuals into anti-amyloid clinical trials. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Plasma levels of Aβ oligomers could be assessed using MDS, which might be a simple, noninvasive, and accessible assay for evaluating brain amyloid deposition related to AD pathology. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

A genome-wide, whole brain approach to investigate genetic effects on neuroimaging phenotypes for identifying quantitative trait loci is described. 4 key findings →

Participants: 818 Evidence: low

Tau PET imaging in neurodegenerative tauopathies-still a challenge

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Molecular psychiatry 2019-01-11

The accumulation of pathological misfolded tau is a feature common to a collective of neurodegenerative disorders known as tauopathies, of which Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

We demonstrate for the first time a link between MBI and early AD pathology in a cognitively intact elderly population, supporting the use of the MBI-C as a metric to enhance clinical trial enrolment. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Tau, amyloid, and hypometabolism in a patient with posterior cortical atrophy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2014-12-17

Determining the relative contribution of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles to brain dysfunction in Alzheimer disease is critical for therapeutic approaches, but until recently could only be assessed at autopsy. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Ligands targeting tau for use with positron emission tomography have rapidly been developed during the past several years, enabling the in vivo study of tau pathology in patients with Alzheimer's disease and related non-Alzheimer's disease tauopathies. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Two monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), aducanumab and lecanemab, have received accelerated approval from the US FDA for initiation of treatment in early Alzheimer's disease patients who have proven β-amyloid pathology (Aβ). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Recently, several high dimensional classification methods have been proposed to automatically discriminate between patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and elderly controls (CN) based on T1-weighted MRI. 4 key findings →

Participants: 509 Evidence: low

Retinal amyloid pathology and proof-of-concept imaging trial in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. JCI insight 2017-08-17

The geometric distribution and increased burden of retinal amyloid pathology in AD, together with the feasibility to noninvasively detect discrete retinal amyloid deposits in living patients, may lead to a practical approach for large-scale AD diagnosis and monitoring. 5 key findings →

Participants: 37 Evidence: low

Recent advancements in Alzheimer's disease treatment have focused on the elimination of amyloid-beta (Aβ) plaque, a hallmark of the disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Lecanemab: Appropriate Use Recommendations by Korean Dementia Association

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Dementia and neurocognitive disorders 2024-10-29

Lecanemab (product name Leqembi®) is an anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody treatment approved for use in Korea for patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Imaging Dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Cells 2024-11-27

Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia in the elderly population (aged 65 years and over), followed by vascular dementia, Lewy body dementia, and rare types of neurodegenerative diseases, including frontotemporal dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 2,885 studies in this tag, 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 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