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

30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 176–200 of 321 studies in How common it is · free to read (page 8 of 13) · 30,980 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 321 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.

Other subjects

Authors

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

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,452 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “How common it is” covers

How common it is — Counting patterns across whole populations: who gets dementia, at what age, and how that is changing.

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 mitochondrial origin for frontotemporal dementia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis through CHCHD10 involvement

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2014-06-16

Mitochondrial DNA instability disorders are responsible for a large clinical spectrum, among which amyotrophic lateral sclerosis-like symptoms and frontotemporal dementia are extremely rare. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Particulate air pollutants, APOE alleles and their contributions to cognitive impairment in older women and to amyloidogenesis in experimental models

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Translational psychiatry 2017-01-31

Exposure to particulate matter (PM) in the ambient air and its interactions with APOE alleles may contribute to the acceleration of brain aging and the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

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

Dementia incidence among a cohort of lebanese older adults: first incidence estimates from the Middle East and North Africa region

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in Dementia 2025-01-07

After 3.5 years of follow up, 19 new cases of dementia were identified among 229 surviving participants. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 341 Evidence: moderate

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

Increased risk of dementia in patients with primary Sjogren’s syndrome: a nationwide population-based cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. The Korean Journal of Internal Medicine 2025-02-21

The incidence of dementia was 0.68 (95% CI 0.64-0.72) cases per 100 person-years in pSS, and it was 0.58 (0.56-0.60) in the controls. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 20,160 Evidence: moderate

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

Knowledge and practice of healthy behaviors for dementia and stroke prevention in a United States cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Scientific Reports 2025-04-30

At least 45% of dementia and 60% of stroke cases are due to modifiable risk factors and could in part be prevented through healthy behavior. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,478 Evidence: moderate

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

Simvastatin strongly reduces levels of Alzheimer's disease beta -amyloid peptides Abeta 42 and Abeta 40 in vitro and in vivo

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2001-04-10

Recent epidemiological studies show a strong reduction in the incidence of Alzheimer's disease in patients treated with cholesterol-lowering statins. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Promoting the clearance of neurotoxic proteins in neurodegenerative disorders of ageing

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Nature reviews. Drug discovery 2018-08-17

Neurodegenerative disorders of ageing (NDAs) such as Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, frontotemporal dementia, Huntington disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis represent a major socio-economic challenge in view of their high prevalence yet poor treatment. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Digital Isolation and Dementia Risk in Older Adults: Longitudinal Cohort Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2025-01-12

The moderate to high isolation group demonstrated a significantly elevated risk of dementia compared with the low isolation group. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 8,189 Evidence: moderate

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

Exploring sex differences in Alzheimer’s disease: a comprehensive analysis of a large patient cohort from a memory unit

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Alzheimer s Research & Therapy 2025-01-22

The study cohort comprised a total of 6108 individuals diagnosed with AD dementia during the study period (28.4% males and 71.6% females). 5 key findings →

Participants: 6,108 Evidence: moderate

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

Identifying pathways to the prevention of dementia: the Netherlands consortium of dementia cohorts

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. BMC Neurology 2025-02-12

We increased the findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability (FAIR) status of the cohorts through harmonization of data across cohorts, implementation of medical imaging repositories for scan management, implementation of the Personal Health Train infrastructure and provision of meta-data in existing cohort catalogues. 5 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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

Regional Differences in Dementia Incidence Among US Veterans

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. JAMA Neurology 2025-06-09

Among the 1 268 599 participants (mean age, 73.9 [SD, 6.1] years; n = 25 335 [2%] female), dementia incidence rates per 1000 person-years were lowest in the Mid-Atlantic (11.2; 95% CI, 11.1-11.4) and highest in the Southeast (14.0; 95% CI, 13.8-14.2). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 25 Evidence: moderate

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

Differences Between Women and Men in Incidence Rates of Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2018-01-01

In the following brief report, we examined gender differences in incidence rates of any dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) alone, and non-Alzheimer's dementia alone in 16,926 women and men in the Swedish Twin Registry aged 65+. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

↑ 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.

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