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 51–75 of 82 studies with an author at University of Milan (IT) · free to read (page 3 of 4) · 31,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 82 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.

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.

Among the more than 90 identified genetic risk loci for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias, the apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene ɛ2/ɛ3/ɛ4 polymorphisms remain the longstanding benchmark for genetic disease risk with a consistently large effect across studies 1-10 . 5 key findings →

Design: case-control Evidence: high

= 0.81). NfL levels were not significantly associated with GDS-15 in a population of community-dwelling older adults without dementia. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 512 Evidence: low

Physiological functions and pathobiology of TDP-43 and FUS/TLS proteins

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Journal of neurochemistry 2016-06-15

The multiple roles played by RNA binding proteins in neurodegeneration have become apparent following the discovery of TAR DNA binding protein 43 kDa (TDP-43) and fused in sarcoma/translocated in liposarcoma (FUS/TLS) involvement in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and frontotemporal lobar dementia. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder accounting for over 50% of all dementia patients and representing a leading cause of death worldwide for the global ageing population. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Nutrition and Lifestyle Interventions in Managing Dyslipidemia and Cardiometabolic Risk

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Nutrients 2025-02-23

Dyslipidemia, characterized by abnormal blood lipid levels, is a major public health concern due to its association with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and other cardiometabolic disorders. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

During aging, there is a progressive impairment of immune cell function that triggers the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines causing the so-called “inflammaging”. 3 key findings →

Participants: 235 Evidence: moderate

Neuropsychological interviews and neuroimaging techniques are traditional diagnostic methods for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →

Participants: 51 Evidence: low

White matter hyperintensities precede other biomarkers in GRN frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-10-01

Symptomatic GRN carriers showed elevated WMHs, primarily in the frontal lobe, while no significant increase was observed in symptomatic C9orf72 or MAPT carriers. 5 key findings →

Participants: 763 Evidence: low

At baseline, sbvFTD showed right-predominant temporal pole involvement associated with significant right frontal atrophy. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

[(11)C](R)PK11195-PET measures upregulation of translocator protein, which is associated with microglial activation, [(11)C]PIB-PET is a marker of amyloid, while [(18)F]FDG-PET measures cerebral glucose metabolism (rCMRGlc). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The RNA-binding proteins TDP-43 and FUS form abnormal cytoplasmic aggregates in affected tissues of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and frontotemporal lobar dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Behavioral variant of Frontotemporal Dementia (bvFTD) and Bipolar Disorder (BD) share overlapping symptoms, complicating diagnosis. 4 key findings →

Participants: 100 Evidence: moderate

Differentiating sporadic frontotemporal dementia from late-onset primary psychiatric disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Brain Communications 2025-01-01

Higher scores in cognitive screening [odds ratio (OR): 1.23], facial emotion processing (OR: 1.69), episodic memory (OR: 1.09), animal fluency (OR: 1.17), working memory (OR: 1.18), letter fluency (OR: 1.17) and depressive symptoms (OR: 7.41) were significantly associated with PPD (all Ps ≤ 0.010). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

In patients with cognitive impairment due to diverse causes, the HTS might occur regardless of MCI versus dementia status and across different etiologies. 4 key findings →

Participants: 121 Evidence: moderate

The present study addresses the following major questions: 1) Are the levels of an alpha-secretase candidate (i.e., ADAM10) reduced in accessible cells of Alzheimer Disease (AD) patients? 2) Are ADAM10 levels in the peripheral cells of AD patients related to a concomitant decrease in alpha APPs? 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Early isolated functional disruptions in salience/visual networks were present in asymptomatic carriers, along with anterior cingulate gray matter reductions. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

As the leading cause of dementia worldwide, Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) has prompted significant interest in developing Deep Learning (DL) approaches for its classification. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The Long Non-Coding RNAs in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Novel Mechanisms of Pathogenesis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Current Alzheimer research 2016-01-01

Long-non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), RNA molecules longer than 200 nucleotides, have been involved in several biological processes and in a growing number of diseases, controlling gene transcription, pre-mRNA processing, the transport of mature mRNAs to specific cellular compartments, the regulation of mRNA stability, protein translation and turnover. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

This joint Position Paper, developed by the Italian Expert Panel on Alzheimer convened by the Italian Society of Neurology with participation from multiple scientific societies, outlines strategic guidelines for reorganizing the patient journey in the era of anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies for Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

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.

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 31,780 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 31,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66% of the library) and OpenAlex (16%), 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.

1,052 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