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.

This study examines the relationship between the levels of apolipoprotein E (apoE) and apolipoprotein J (apoJ, also designated as clusterin) as a function of apoE genotype in the hippocampus and cortex of Alzheimer disease (AD) subjects. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Apolipoprotein-E epsilon 4 (APOE-epsilon 4) has been consistently associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) and may be responsible for an earlier age at onset. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Obesity is a multifactorial disease in which environmental conditions and several genes play an important role in the development of this disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Millions of Mexico, US and across the world children are overweight and obese. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

An inherited variable poly-T repeat genotype in TOMM40 in Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2010-05-01

I coauthored a recently published research article describing a variable length, poly-T polymorphism in the TOMM40 gene, adjacent to apolipoprotein E (APOE) on chromosome 19, that accounts for the age at onset distribution for a complex disease, late-onset Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Deposition of beta-amyloid (A beta), a metabolite of approximately 4 kd of the amyloid precursor protein, is a critical pathological feature in Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Previous studies with positron-emission tomography (PET) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) have indicated differences in neural metabolism and activity between carriers of the APOE epsilon4 allele and those who are not at risk for Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 25 Evidence: low

Defining the spectrum of frontotemporal dementias associated with TARDBP mutations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Neurology. Genetics 2016-05-26

We describe the largest series of patients with TARDBP mutations presenting with frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and review the cases in the literature to precisely characterize FTD diseases associated with this genotype. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: epidemiology, pathology, diagnosis and management

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. CNS drugs 2012-10-01

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) describes a spectrum of clinically, pathologically and genetically heterogeneous neurodegenerative disorders of unknown aetiology. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The Cache County Study of Memory in Aging (CCMS) is an epidemiological study of Alzheimer's disease (AD), mild cognitive disorders, and aging in a population of exceptionally long-lived individuals (7th to 11th decade). 1 key finding →

Participants: 507 Evidence: low

In Alzheimer Disease (AD), the mechanistic connection of the two major pathological hallmarks, namely deposition of Amyloid-beta (Aβ) in the form of extracellular plaques, and the pathological changes of the intracellular protein Tau (such as phosphorylation, missorting, aggregation), is not well understood. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Are hereditary hemochromatosis mutations involved in Alzheimer disease?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. American journal of medical genetics 2000-07-01

Mutations in the class I-like major histocompatibility complex gene called HFE are associated with hereditary hemochromatosis (HHC), a disorder of excessive iron uptake. 3 key findings →

Participants: 26 Evidence: low

Aβ is the main component of amyloid deposits in Alzheimer disease (AD) and its aggregation into oligomers, protofibrils and fibrils is considered a seminal event in the pathogenesis of AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Our findings suggest that restoration of the expression of nuclear-encoded OXPHOS genes in aging could be a viable strategy for blunting AD progression. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Beta-amyloid peptides that are cleaved from the amyloid precursor protein (APP) play a critical role in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 3,521 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 27,380 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