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

Showing 201–225 of 236 studies in Genetics · tagged Risk Factors (page 9 of 10) · 30,980 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 236 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.

What “Genetics” covers

Genetics — Inherited risk: APOE and the other risk genes, and what they do and don't tell you.

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.

A pathologic role of higher TC or cholesterol-based differential survival of epsilon 4-carrying individuals may be involved in the relationship of the epsilon 4 allele with AD. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Using a 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach, we evaluated MR evidence for genetically proxied effects of 10 pre-specified gut bacterial classes on type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and Alzheimer disease (AD), and assessed MR evidence for a direct genetically proxied effect of T2DM on AD. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The AD PRS was associated with AD in the ADSP sample, with odds ratios per standard deviation ranging from 1.14 to 1.52 across ancestry groups and robust validation in independent cohorts (Figure 1). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Apolipoprotein (apo) E was initially described as a lipid transport protein and major ligand for low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors with a role in cholesterol metabolism and cardiovascular disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) is the major lipid-carrier protein in the brain, and several studies provided evidence that ApoE epsilon4 allele can be considered a genetic risk factor for vascular diseases. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Risk factors for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Folia neuropathologica 2019-01-01

Early reviews identified over 20 risk factors associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) including age, familial inheritance, exposure to aluminium, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and associated co-morbidities such as vascular disease and infection. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Although plasma cholesterol levels are not generally associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) incidence, in vitro studies have found that increased cellular cholesterol levels are associated with increases in -amyloid (A ) production, with a concomitant decrease in sAPPa, the secreted non amyloidogenic fragment of the amyloid precursor protein (APP). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and dementia frequently co-occur, yet the biological mechanisms underlying this comorbidity remain incompletely understood. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Apolipoprotein E polymorphism and cardiovascular disease: a HuGE review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. American journal of epidemiology 2002-03-01

This review examines the association between the apolipoprotein (apo) var epsilon gene polymorphism (or its protein product (apo E)), metabolic regulation of cholesterol, and cardiovascular disease. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Zinc and human health: an update

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Archives of toxicology 2011-11-10

The importance of micronutrients in health and nutrition is undisputable, and among them, zinc is an essential element whose significance to health is increasingly appreciated and whose deficiency may play an important role in the appearance of diseases. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Lipids are water-insoluble molecules that have a wide variety of functions within cells, including: 1) maintenance of electrochemical gradients; 2) subcellular partitioning; 3) first- and second-messenger cell signaling; 4) energy storage; and 5) protein trafficking and membrane anchoring. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Clinical and epidemiological studies have found that type 2 diabetes, and hyperinsulinaemia, increased the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the elderly. 2 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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.

1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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    Where this research is being discussed: events