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
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 1,251–1,275 of 3,529 studies · tagged Genetics(page 51 of 142)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
From OpenAlex; 12,859 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 use of new technologies (i.e., mobile ecological momentary assessments [EMAs], activity tracker) in the PENSA study allows the collection of continuous data on lifestyle behaviors (diet and physical activity) and mood, enabling a personalized design as well as an intensive follow-up of participants. 2 key findings →
Huntington disease (HD) is a rare neurodegenerative disorder of the central nervous system characterized by unwanted choreatic movements, behavioral and psychiatric disturbances and dementia. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2009-11-01
Amnestic forms of MCI appear to have demographic, genetic, and MRI findings suggestive of Alzheimer disease pathology, whereas the nonamnestic forms of MCI have findings suggestive of vascular disease. 4 key findings →
Apolipoprotein E ( APOE ) ε4 genotype is associated with increased risk of dementia in Parkinson's disease (PD), but the mechanism is not clear, because patients often have a mixture of α-synuclein (αSyn), amyloid-β (Aβ), and tau pathologies. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2012-09-12
Alzheimer's disease (AD) can be classified based on the relative density of neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in the hippocampus and association cortices into three subtypes: typical AD, hippocampal-sparing AD (HpSp AD), and limbic-predominant AD (LP AD). 4 key findings →
Differences between predictors for dementia in younger old versus oldest old populations, as well as for dementia versus pathology, should be considered more carefully in future studies. 4 key findings →
Loss-of-function mutations in progranulin (GRN) cause ubiquitin- and TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43)-positive frontotemporal dementia (FTLD-U), a progressive neurodegenerative disease affecting approximately 10% of early-onset dementia patients. 4 key findings →
Down syndrome (also known as trisomy 21) is the model human phenotype for all genomic gain dosage imbalances, including microduplications. 4 key findings →
Some cases of autosomal dominant familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (FALS) are associated with mutations in the gene encoding Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase (SOD1), suggesting that oxidative damage may play a role in ALS pathogenesis. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2012-11-01
Mutations in the glucocerebrosidase (GBA) gene, which encodes the lysosomal enzyme that is deficient in Gaucher's disease, are important and common risk factors for Parkinson's disease and related disorders. 1 key finding →
Frontotemporal dementia with parkinsonism, chromosome 17 type (FTDP-17) is caused by mutations in the tau gene, and the signature lesions of FTDP-17 are filamentous tau inclusions. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·1997-06-01
We held an international consensus conference on frontotemporal dementia, behavioral disturbances, and parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17 to determine whether these are homogeneous or heterogeneous disorders, to agree on terminology, and to develop strategies for further research. 3 key findings →
Recently, mutations in the progranulin (PGRN) gene were found to cause familial and apparently sporadic frontotemporal lobe dementia (FTLD). 1 key finding →
Pallido-ponto-nigral degeneration (PPND) is one of the most well characterized familial neurodegenerative disorders linked to chromosome 17q21-22. 5 key findings →
Executive predominant AD may reflect an alternative underlying pathophysiology related to genetic status, reflected in more prominent pathological alterations in frontoparietal regions subserving executive function. 2 key findings →
The R47H variant of the Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) significantly increases the risk for late onset Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) gene is a recently identified susceptibility gene for Alzheimer's disease (AD), as its low-frequency variants increase the risk of this disease with an odds ratio similar to that of an APOE ɛ4 allele. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2016-07-01
With the advent of genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and next-generation sequencing, more than 20 risk loci that affect Alzheimer's disease have been identified. 4 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.
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 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%),
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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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.