alzhub.org
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.

Research

31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 26–49 of 49 studies by Petersen RC · tagged Early Stage (page 2 of 2) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 49 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.

Subjects

Other authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,851 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

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.

Practice parameter: early detection of dementia: mild cognitive impairment (an evidence-based review) [RETIRED]. Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Neurology 2001-05-01

There were insufficient data to make any recommendations regarding cognitive screening of asymptomatic individuals. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer disease in the community

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2013-08-01

The NIA-AA criteria apply to most MCI subjects in both the community and clinical trials settings; however, a sizeable proportion of subjects had conflicting biomarkers, which may be very important and need to be explored. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease: Movement Disorder Society Task Force guidelines

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society 2012-01-24

Mild cognitive impairment is common in nondemented Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and may be a harbinger of dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

3D maps from multiple MRI illustrate changing atrophy patterns as subjects progress from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2007-05-28

Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) was used to assess patterns of grey matter atrophy in the aMCI subjects at each time-point compared to the control group. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Mild cognitive impairment can be distinguished from Alzheimer disease and normal aging for clinical trials

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2004-01-01

Patients with MCI had a predominant memory impairment with relative sparing of other cognitive domains and were intermediate between clinically normal individuals and patients with AD on cognitive and functional ratings. 3 key findings →

Participants: 769 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Identification of altered metabolic pathways in plasma and CSF in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease using metabolomics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. PloS one 2013-05-20

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) currently affects more than 5 million Americans, with numbers expected to grow dramatically as the population ages. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Hippocampal volumes, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy metabolites, and cerebrovascular disease in mild cognitive impairment subtypes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2008-12-01

The MRI and 1H MRS findings in single-domain aMCI are consistent with a pattern similar to that of Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 32 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Longitudinal 1H MRS changes in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2006-07-24

Magnetic resonance (MR)-based volume measurements of atrophy are potential markers of disease progression in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Self-rated and informant-rated everyday function in comparison to objective markers of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2014-11-15

It is recognized that individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) already demonstrate difficulty in aspects of daily functioning, which predicts disease progression. 2 key findings →

Participants: 1,080 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Update on the biomarker core of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative subjects

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2010-05-01

Here, we review progress by the Penn Biomarker Core in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) toward developing a pathological cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma biomarker signature for mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) as well as a biomarker profile that predicts conversion of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and/or normal control subjects to AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

MRI patterns of atrophy associated with progression to AD in amnestic mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Neurology 2007-09-26

The regions of loss observed in subjects with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) who progressed to Alzheimer disease (AD) within 18 months of the MRI are typical of subjects with AD. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Sex, apolipoprotein E epsilon 4 status, and hippocampal volume in mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2005-06-01

The APOE*E4 genotype status appears to have a greater deleterious effect on gross hippocampal pathology and memory performance in women than in men. 4 key findings →

Participants: 193 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

DWI predicts future progression to Alzheimer disease in amnestic mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neurology 2005-03-01

The authors assessed whether measures of hippocampal water diffusivity at baseline can predict future progression to Alzheimer disease (AD) in amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Validation of the telephone interview for cognitive status-modified in subjects with normal cognition, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neuroepidemiology 2009-11-05

The extensive in-person assessment classified 83 persons with normal cognition, 42 persons with MCI, and 42 persons with dementia. 1 key finding →

Participants: 83 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Prediction of conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease dementia based upon biomarkers and neuropsychological test performance

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2010-12-14

The current study tested the accuracy of primary MRI and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker candidates and neuropsychological tests for predicting the conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. 1 key finding →

Participants: 81 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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 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