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.

Soluble TREM2 is elevated in Parkinson's disease subgroups with increased CSF tau

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2020-03-01

Parkinson's disease is the second most common neurodegenerative disease after Alzheimer's disease and affects 1% of the population above 60 years old. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 165 Evidence: low

The innate immune system is implicated in Parkinson's disease (PD), but peripheral in-vivo clinical evidence of the components and driving mechanisms involved and their relationship with clinical heterogeneity and progression to dementia remain poorly explored. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 41 Evidence: moderate

Longitudinal outcome of Parkinson's disease patients with psychosis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Neurology 2003-06-01

Baseline data available from 59 patients enrolled in the PSYCLOPS (PSychosis and CLOzapine in PD Study) trial included age, age at onset of PD, duration of PD and psychosis, character of psychosis, medications, living setting, and scores for Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, Hoehn and Yahr Scale, and Clinical Global Impression Scale. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 59 Evidence: moderate

Prognosis of Parkinson disease: risk of dementia and mortality: the Rotterdam Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2005-08-01

Most prognostic studies on Parkinson disease have been hospital based or have applied register-based case-finding methods. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 6,969 Evidence: moderate

We identified individuals with an incident diagnosis of PD (n=1276) and controls (n=500 406) in UK Biobank. 4 key findings →

Participants: 1,276 Evidence: moderate

Dietary folate, vitamin B12, and vitamin B6 and the risk of Parkinson disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Neurology 2006-07-01

Increased homocysteine levels might accelerate dopaminergic cell death in Parkinson disease (PD), through neurotoxic effects. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 5,289 Evidence: moderate

Familial aggregation of parkinsonism in progressive supranuclear palsy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Neurology 2009-05-20

Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by aggregates of the microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT). 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 172 Evidence: moderate

Early onset hallucinations were significantly more common in pLBD than pAD (OR 0.069 [95% CI 0.012-0.397], p = 0.003) or mixed AD+LBD (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.010-0.771], p = 0.028) and there was a greater increase in the odds of hallucinations over time in pAD and AD+LBD than pLBD such that there was was no difference in the prevalence of late-onset hallucinations between pLBD, pAD or AD+LBD. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 37 Evidence: moderate

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a neurodegenerative tauopathy associated with repeated subconcussive and concussive head injury. 4 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

Our results provide evidence of the potential of Souvenaid™ therapy for the treatment of behavioral disturbances and social cognition skills in FTD. 2 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high

This cross-sectional study found a strong correlation between age of onset of PD and dietary habits, suggesting that nutritional strategies may be an effective tool to delay PD onset. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 167 Evidence: low

A panel of nine CSF biomarkers was able to differentiate APS from patients with PD and dementia. 2 key findings →

Design: prospective cohort Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are two related currently incurable neurodegenerative diseases. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Pathologic staging systems suggest that autonomic dysfunction may be an early manifestation of Parkinson's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies. 2 key findings →

Design: prospective cohort Participants: 91 Evidence: moderate

Our findings raise concerns about potential effects of air pollution from traffic and other sources on the risk of PD, particularly in populations with high or increasing exposures. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate

Both atrophy (AUC = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [95% CI: 0.79 to 0.94]) and NfL (AUC = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.96) showed significant predictive ability, which improved when combined (AUC = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.87 to 0.99). 5 key findings →

Participants: 55 Evidence: low

The study included 1 789 participants (1 206 with AD, 111 with DLB, 49 with VaD, and 423 with NC). 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 789 Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 2,453 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