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

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 →

Participants: 200 Evidence: high

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 →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 153 Evidence: low

Hexanucleotide repeat expansion in C9ORF72 is the most common genetic cause of frontotemporal dementia and motor neuron disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

APOE genotype regulates pathology and disease progression in synucleinopathy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Science translational medicine 2020-02-01

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Participants: 18 Evidence: low

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 →

Participants: 245 Evidence: moderate

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

To date, molecular genetic analyses have identified over 500 distinct DNA variants in five disease genes associated with familial Parkinson disease; alpha-synuclein (SNCA), parkin (PARK2), PTEN-induced putative kinase 1 (PINK1), DJ-1 (PARK7), and Leucine-rich repeat kinase 2 (LRRK2). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

Pallido-ponto-nigral degeneration (PPND) is one of the most well characterized familial neurodegenerative disorders linked to chromosome 17q21-22. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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 →

Participants: 100 Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

↑ 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 27,380 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed