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 676–700 of 1,172 studies · free to read · tagged Early Stage (page 28 of 47) · 31,380 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.

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) as a precursor of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is the focus of recent research, trying to explore the early mechanisms and possible biomarkers of DLB. 5 key findings →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

Analysis of variances, adjusted for sex and age, showed that all structures, except the globus pallidus, were smaller in AD than in controls. 3 key findings →

Participants: 773 Evidence: low

Dynamic changes of CSF sTREM2 in preclinical Alzheimer's disease: the CABLE study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Molecular neurodegeneration 2020-04-10

Loss of function of triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell 2 (TREM2), a key receptor selectively expressed by microglia in the brain, contributes to the development of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Differential diagnosis between dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) is not straightforward, especially in the early stages of disease. 4 key findings →

Participants: 57 Evidence: low

Accumulating data suggest cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) neurogranin (Ng) as a potential biomarker for cognitive decline and neurodegeneration in Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Reliability of quantitative gait assessment while dual-tasking (walking while doing a secondary task such as talking) in people with cognitive impairment is unknown. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Tensor-based morphometry (TBM) creates three-dimensional maps of disease-related differences in brain structure, based on nonlinearly registering brain MRI scans to a common image template. 4 key findings →

Participants: 120 Evidence: low

Disease-modifying treatment trials are increasingly advanced to the prodromal or preclinical phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and inclusion criteria are based on biomarkers rather than clinical symptoms. 4 key findings →

Participants: 13 Evidence: low

In this article, the authors aim to maximally utilize multimodality neuroimaging and genetic data for identifying Alzheimer's disease (AD) and its prodromal status, Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), from normal aging subjects. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Positron emission tomography (PET) with 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) reveals altered cerebral metabolism in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's dementia (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 332 Evidence: low

The mean (SD) age of the 4,631 participants was 67.6 (4.89) years, and 2579 (55.7%) were women. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 4,943 Evidence: low

Exposure to high neighborhood‐level socioeconomic disadvantage is associated with negative health outcomes. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 645 Evidence: moderate

Four thousand four hundred eighty-six participants were included (mean age 71.3 ± 4.7 years, 30% participants Aβ+, 59% female). 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

No model terms met the a priori cut-off beyond the base model, including device type, response input source (e.g. mouse, etc.), or session interference. 5 key findings →

Participants: 167 Evidence: low

In this cohort, 28 participants developed Alzheimer's dementia, 5 frontotemporal dementia, 2 Lewy body dementia, and 2 vascular dementia during the follow-up. 5 key findings →

Participants: 56 Evidence: moderate

The rate of reversion from MCI to normal cognition was 37.0% after 2 years and 32.9% after 12 years. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,262 Evidence: moderate

Cross-sectional studies suggest a limited relationship between accelerated epigenetic aging derived from epigenetic clocks, and Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology or risk. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

BIOFACE is a two-year study of clinical, cognition, and biomarkers that will shed light on the physiopathology and the potential utility of plasma and NPEs as non-invasive early diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in people younger than 65 years. 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

Several recent research studies show high performance of blood biomarkers to identify Alzheimer's disease also in the pre-dementia mild cognitive impairment (MCI) stage, but data from the routine clinical care memory clinic setting are needed. 1 key finding →

Participants: 54 Evidence: low

Genome-wide association study identifies two loci influencing plasma neurofilament light levels

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. BMC medical genomics 2018-05-10

GWAS found the associations of two single nucleotide polymorphisms (rs7943454 and rs640476) with plasma NFL at suggestive levels. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 179 Evidence: moderate

↑ 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.

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