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 2,146 studies · tagged Early Stage (page 74 of 86) · 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.

Cerebrospinal Fluid Profile of Lipid Mediators in Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Cellular and molecular neurobiology 2022-04-01

Alzheimer's disease (AD) develops into dementia over a period of several years, during which subjective cognitive impairment (SCI) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) can be used as intermediary diagnoses of increasing severity. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The SCD and aMCI groups showed both decreased ReHo in the right middle temporal gyrus (MTG) and decreased GMV compared to healthy controls (HCs). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The Early Stage of Abnormal Aging: Cognitive Impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Advances in experimental medicine and biology 2023

Cognitive impairment has become an important aspect affecting the health and quality of life of middle-aged and elderly people, which is defined as the difficulty of thought processing and leads to memory loss, difficulties making decisions, the inability to concentrate, and difficulties learning. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cognitive interventions for memory and psychological well-being in aging and dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Frontiers in psychology 2023-02-02

The human lifespan has expanded drastically in the last few centuries, due to improvements in sanitation, medicine, and nutrition, but with this increase in longevity comes higher rates of cognitive pathology such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia; the latter is estimated to reach more than 75 million people by 2030. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

In BriefIn the search for biomarkers of synapse loss associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), we used shotgun proteomics to identify a panel of 9 synaptic proteins detectable in human cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).Expression at the human synapse was verified using super resolution microscopy. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

In MCI/AD, both the CSF and serum samples had significantly elevated mean levels of C-peptide and an incretin, and reduced expression of Visfatin, whereas only CSF showed significant reductions in insulin and leptin and only serum had increased glucagon, PAI-1, and ghrelin. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Blood-based biomarkers are promising tools for the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD) at prodromal stages (mild cognitive impairment [MCI]) and are hoped to be implemented as screening tools for patients with cognitive complaints. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

MTL 11C-acetate SUVR was significantly elevated in MCI compared to cognitively normal participants (P = 0.03; Cohen d = 1.76). 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Test-retest reliability data of the Arabic MoCA were collected approximately 35.0 +/- 17.6 days apart. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Over 78 million people will suffer from dementia by 2030, emphasizing the need for early identification of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) at risk, and personalized clinical evaluation steps to diagnose potentially reversible causes. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Our results suggest that DTI data provide better prediction accuracy than GM volume in predementia AD. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The verbal fluency task (VFT) is a well-established cognitive marker for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in the prodromal stage of Alzheimer´s dementia (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Endocytic alterations are one of the earliest changes to occur in Alzheimer's disease (AD), and are hypothesized to be involved in the selective vulnerability of specific neuronal populations during the progression of AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 2,141 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