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 1,926–1,950 of 2,900 studies · tagged Brain Scans (page 78 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.

In vivo imaging of fibrillar β-amyloid deposits may assist clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), aid treatment selection for patients, assist clinical trials of therapeutic drugs through subject selection, and be used as an outcome measure. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Generated MR images from florbetapir PET showed signal patterns that were visually similar to the real MR. The structural similarity index between real and generated MR was 0.91 ± 0.04. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Flortaucipir uptake distinguished individuals with PCA and amnestic AD dementia early in the symptomatic course. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neurofilament light chain (NFL) has been recently introduced as a biomarker of early dementia. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) is a proxy for regional hypometabolism in Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 149 Evidence: moderate

We demonstrated a moderate positive correlation between PDGFRβ and both total Tau and phosphorylated Tau 181 in cognitively normal individuals. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

With the introduction of the new causal amyloid targeting therapies, the role of biomarker-assisted diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD) has received a further boost. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Previous studies with positron-emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) have indicated differences in neural metabolism and activity between carriers of the APOE epsilon4 allele and those who are not at risk for Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 25 Evidence: low

Functional implications of hippocampal volume and diffusivity in mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. NeuroImage 2005-08-03

Hippocampal atrophy has been related to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and early Alzheimer disease (AD), but the diagnostic significance of cross-sectionally determined hippocampal volumes is still ambiguous. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The authors' findings suggest that the effectiveness of explicit-memory training in patients with MCI is associated with training-specific increases in activation and connectivity in a distributed neural system that includes areas involved in explicit memory. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Previous MRI studies reported cortical iron accumulation in early-onset (EOAD) compared to late-onset (LOAD) Alzheimer disease patients. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Our results suggest that the breakdown of DMN connectivity may occur in the early stage of MCI. 4 key findings →

Participants: 130 Evidence: low

Despite variation and overlap of atrophy patterns, visual inspection of regional atrophy on MRI may aid in discriminating AD and FTLD. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The non-fluent/agrammatic variant of primary progressive aphasia (nfvPPA) and the behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) are focal neurodegenerative disorders belonging to the FTD-spectrum clinical syndromes. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

There is accumulating evidence suggesting that changes in brain perfusion are present long before the clinical symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD), perhaps even before amyloid-β accumulation or brain atrophy. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) describes a state of cognitive functioning that is below defined norms, yet falls short of dementia in severity. 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