alzhub.org
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.

Research

30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 726–750 of 2,751 studies · tagged Other Dementias (page 30 of 111) · 30,180 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)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 15,654 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.

Progression of language decline and cortical atrophy in subtypes of primary progressive aphasia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Neurology 2011-05-01

The results suggest that the unique features, which sharply differentiate the PPA variants at the early to middle stages, may lose their distinctiveness as the degeneration becomes more severe. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Serum neurofilament light chain in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Neurology 2018-09-12

As serum NfL correlates with functional impairment and brain atrophy in bvFTD at different disease stages, we propose it as marker of disease severity, paving the way for its future use as outcome measure for clinical trials. 1 key finding →

Participants: 74 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

High-sensitivity plasma proteomics reveals disease-specific signatures and predictive biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease phenotypes in a large mixed-dementia cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Molecular neurodegeneration 2025-11-17

Novel plasma assays enabled accurate blood-based biomarkers for neurodegenerative diseases with minimally invasive options for clinical use. 5 key findings →

Participants: 3,232 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Prevalence and impact of vascular and Alzheimer pathologies in Lewy body disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2008-02-14

Whereas the prevalence and impact of vascular pathology in Alzheimer diease (AD) are well established, the role of vascular and Alzheimer pathologies in the progression of neurodegeneration and cognitive impairment in Parkinson disease (PD) is under discussion. 4 key findings →

Participants: 100 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Glutathione S-transferase omega genes in Alzheimer and Parkinson disease risk, age-at-diagnosis and brain gene expression: an association study with mechanistic implications

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Molecular neurodegeneration 2012-04-11

These results suggest that GSTO locus variants may lower brain GSTO2 levels and consequently confer AD risk in older age. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis - frontotemporal spectrum disorder (ALS-FTSD): Revised diagnostic criteria

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration 2017-01-05

This article presents the revised consensus criteria for the diagnosis of frontotemporal dysfunction in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) based on an international research workshop on frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and ALS held in London, Canada in June 2015. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Rapid-eye-movement sleep behaviour disorder as an early marker for a neurodegenerative disorder: a descriptive study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. The Lancet. Neurology 2006-07-01

20 (45%) patients developed a neurological disorder after a mean of 11.5 years from the reported onset of RBD and a mean follow-up of 5.1 years from the diagnosis of idiopathic RBD at our sleep centre. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Rapid and ultra-sensitive quantitation of disease-associated α-synuclein seeds in brain and cerebrospinal fluid by αSyn RT-QuIC

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica communications 2018-02-09

The diagnosis and treatment of synucleinopathies such as Parkinson disease and dementia with Lewy bodies would be aided by the availability of assays for the pathogenic disease-associated forms of α-synuclein (αSyn D ) that are sufficiently sensitive, specific, and practical for analysis of accessible diagnostic specimens. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Amyloid imaging with (18)F-florbetaben in Alzheimer disease and other dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 2011-07-15

When compared with the other groups, AD patients demonstrated significantly higher SUVRs (P Conclusion (18)F-florbetaben had high sensitivity for AD, clearly distinguished patients with FTLD from AD, and provided results comparable to those reported with (11)C-Pittsburgh Compound B in a variety of neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Differential circadian rhythm disturbances in men with Alzheimer disease and frontotemporal degeneration

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Archives of general psychiatry 2001-04-01

Patients with AD and patients with FTD show different disturbances in their rhythms of activity and temperature compared with each other and with normal elderly patients. 3 key findings →

Participants: 23 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

From across this tag

10 of the 2,748 studies in this tag that have a study page, 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 30,180 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 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), 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.

1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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