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

31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 26–50 of 87 studies with an author at University of Cologne (DE) · free to read (page 2 of 4) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 87 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.

Other institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,851 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.

Transferability of European-derived Alzheimer's disease polygenic risk scores across multiancestry populations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Nature genetics 2025-06-18

A polygenic score (PGS) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) was derived recently from data on genome-wide significant loci in European ancestry populations. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort Evidence: high

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

A nonsynonymous mutation in PLCG2 reduces the risk of Alzheimer's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies and frontotemporal dementia, and increases the likelihood of longevity

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2019-05-27

The genetic variant rs72824905-G (minor allele) in the PLCG2 gene was previously associated with a reduced Alzheimer's disease risk (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 53,627 Evidence: low

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

Transethnic meta-analysis of rare coding variants in PLCG2, ABI3, and TREM2 supports their general contribution to Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Translational psychiatry 2019-01-31

Rare coding variants in TREM2, PLCG2, and ABI3 were recently associated with the susceptibility to Alzheimer's disease (AD) in Caucasians. 2 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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

Design and first baseline data of the DZNE multicenter observational study on predementia Alzheimer's disease (DELCODE)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2018-02-07

In this publication, we report cognitive and clinical data as well as apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker results of the first 394 baseline data sets. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Circulating metabolites and general cognitive ability and dementia: Evidence from 11 cohort studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2018-01-06

Circulating metabolites were consistently associated with cognition, dementia, and lifestyle factors, opening new avenues for prevention of cognitive decline and dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 25,872 Evidence: low

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

Discrimination between Alzheimer dementia and controls by automated analysis of multicenter FDG PET

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. NeuroImage 2002-09-01

A new diagnostic indicator of FDG PET scan abnormality, based on age-adjusted t statistics and an automated voxel-based procedure, is presented and validated in a large data set comprising 110 normal controls and 395 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) that were studied in eight participating centers. 5 key findings →

Participants: 395 Evidence: low

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

Multicenter standardized 18F-FDG PET diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer's disease, and other dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 2008-02-20

Standardized automated analysis of (18)F-FDG PET scans may provide an objective and sensitive support to the clinical diagnosis in early dementia. 1 key finding →

Participants: 548 Evidence: low

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

Clinical diagnosis of progressive supranuclear palsy: The movement disorder society criteria

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Movement Disorders 2017-05-03

Here, we present new criteria aimed to optimize early, sensitive, and specific clinical diagnosis of PSP on the basis of currently available evidence. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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

Mild cognitive impairment with suspected nonamyloid pathology (SNAP): Prediction of progression

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neurology 2015-01-07

The proportion of progressors was 11% (8/41), 34% (14/41), 56% (19/34), and 71% (60/85) in A-N-, A+N-, SNAP, and A+N+, respectively; the proportion of APOE ε4 carriers was 29%, 70%, 31%, and 71%, respectively, with the SNAP group featuring a significantly different proportion than both A+N- and A+N+ groups (p ≤ 0.005). 2 key findings →

Participants: 201 Evidence: low

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

Dementia prevention in memory clinics: recommendations from the European task force for brain health services

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. The Lancet regional health. Europe 2023-01-31

Observational population studies indicate that prevention of dementia and cognitive decline is being accomplished, possibly as an unintended result of better vascular prevention and healthier lifestyles. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Characterization and clinical use of inflammatory cerebrospinal fluid protein markers in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2018-02-26

Neuroinflammation has gained increasing attention as a potential contributing factor in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. 4 key findings →

Participants: 399 Evidence: moderate

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

Gradual Disturbances of the Amplitude of Low-Frequency Fluctuations (ALFF) and Fractional ALFF in Alzheimer Spectrum

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Frontiers in neuroscience 2018-12-20

In the machine learning verification, the identification accuracy of SCD, aMCI, d-AD from NC was higher when fused ALFF and fALFF features (76.44, 81.94, and 91.83%, respectively) than only using ALFF or fALFF features. 5 key findings →

Participants: 44 Evidence: low

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

Subjective Cognitive Decline in Older Adults: An Overview of Self-Report Measures Used Across 19 International Research Studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2015-09-01

Research increasingly suggests that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in older adults, in the absence of objective cognitive dysfunction or depression, may be a harbinger of non-normative cognitive decline and eventual progression to dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The economic burden of subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's dementia: excess costs and associated clinical and risk factors

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2025-06-26

Healthcare costs are already elevated in early subjective and objective cognitive impairment, driven by formal and informal care. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

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
  • Randomized / 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
  • Multicenter 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.

1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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