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 Helpline800-272-390024 hours a day, 365 days a yearFree, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline98824/7Call 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) Helpline866-232-84849:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a weekLicensed 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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 1,426–1,450 of 1,593 studies · free to read · tagged Genetics(page 58 of 64)· 28,180 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)
From OpenAlex; 13,658 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.
The AD PRS was associated with AD in the ADSP sample, with odds ratios per standard deviation ranging from 1.14 to 1.52 across ancestry groups and robust validation in independent cohorts (Figure 1). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Medicine·2026-01-30
To evaluate the possible causality between Alzheimer disease (AD) and delirium, a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) method and gene colocalization strategy were employed. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD) are neurodegenerative conditions that cause gradual deterioration of cognition, memory and language in the elderly. 1 key finding →
We found cortical regions where a reduced glucose metabolism was maximally correlated with distributed patterns of tau, accounting for the effect of Aβ and APOE ε4 genotype. 5 key findings →
M07-TFN showed higher binding affinities and stronger activation of hTREM2 signaling than all previously described anti-hTREM2 antibodies. p-Syk activation was increased 30-fold in hTREM2-overexpressing HEK293 cells and fourfold in human microglia cells compared to baseline. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Inflammation Research·2025-10-22
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most prevalent neurodegenerative disease associated with accumulation of amyloid beta peptides and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles formed by hyperphosphorylated Tau. 1 key finding →
This study replicated the associations of SORL1, CR1, ADAM17, RASGEF1C, SPI1 , and ADAMTS1 with AD risk and protection are found in Cuban Americans. 4 key findings →
Cytoplasmic mislocalisation and nuclear depletion of TDP-43 are pathological hallmarks of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), including mutations in the C9ORF72 gene that characterise the most common genetic form of ALS (C9ALS). 3 key findings →
Our results demonstrate that gene expression in trisomy 21 affected placentas significantly differs from that of chromosomally normal placentas, and this difference is only partially explained by over-expression of genes from chromosome 21. 5 key findings →
Microglia are resident mononuclear phagocytes that play a principal role in the maintenance of normal tissue homeostasis in the central nervous system (CNS). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100.·Neurobiology of Aging·2025-07-16
Alzheimer disease (AD) polygenic risk scores (ADPRS) built from cell-type (ct) specific genetic variants can be used to infer cell-type contributions to AD. 5 key findings →
The apolipoprotein ε4 allele (APOE4) is associated with decreased longevity and increased vulnerability to age-related declines and disorders across multiple systems. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100.·Neurobiology of Aging·2026-09-01
Mineralized blood vessels (MBV) are a form of vascular pathology associated with cerebrovascular aging and neurodegeneration; however, their regional distribution and clinicopathological correlates in Alzheimer disease (AD) remain poorly characterized. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100.·Medicine·2025-08-29
Neurodegenerative diseases (NDs) are common chronic diseases with unknown etiology, and the association between virus and its pathogenesis is not clear. 5 key findings →
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 tierup to 10 pts
Journal's citation recordup to 4 pts
Study designup to 12 pts
Strength of evidenceup to 5 pts
Peer-review validationup to 10 pts
How recentup to 5 pts
Sample sizeup to 4 pts
Effect reportedup to 3 pts
Studied in peopleup to 3 pts
Randomised / blindedup to 2 pts
Times citedup to 7 pts
Citations per yearup to 5 pts
Impact for its field and yearup to 6 pts
Cited by studies hereup to 6 pts
Still being citedup to 4 pts
Senior author's track recordup to 4 pts
Institution's track recordup to 3 pts
Multi-centre collaborationup to 3 pts
Indexed in PubMedup to 2 pts
Free to readup 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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.