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

31,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 126–150 of 233 studies with an author at University of Michigan (US) · free to read (page 6 of 10) · 31,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 233 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; 17,251 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.

Assessment of cognition using surveys and neuropsychological assessment: the Health and Retirement Study and the Aging, Demographics, and Memory Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences 2011-07-01

Cognitive assessment appropriate for diagnosis of dementia and CIND in large population surveys could be improved with more targeted information from informants and additional cognitive tests targeting other areas of brain function. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Prevalence of depression among older Americans: the Aging, Demographics and Memory Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. International psychogeriatrics 2009-06-12

The finding of similar prevalence estimates for depression in men and women was not consistent with prior research that has shown a female predominance. 3 key findings →

Participants: 851 Evidence: low

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

Derivation and Internal Validation of a Clinical Prediction Tool for 30-Day Mortality in Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. The American journal of medicine 2017-01-05

A clinical tool can be used to predict 30-day mortality in patients hospitalized with lower gastrointestinal bleeding. 2 key findings →

Participants: 4,044 Evidence: moderate

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

Geographic Variation in Neurologist Density and Neurologic Care in the United States

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Neurology 2020-12-23

Mean density of neurologists varied nearly 4-fold from the lowest to the highest density quintile (9.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.2-10.2] vs 43.1 [95% CI 37.6-48.5] per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Validity and reliability of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) for dementia assessment in rural South Africa

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-08-01

Index participants averaged 71.9 years, with > 50% lacking formal education. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,309 Evidence: moderate

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

Sex differences in clinical phenotypes of behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-04-01

Females with sporadic bvFTD showed worse compulsive behavior (p = 0.026) and language impairments (p = 0.024) compared to females with genetic bvFTD (n = 152). 5 key findings →

Participants: 152 Evidence: low

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

Location of pathogenic variants in PSEN1 impacts progression of cognitive, clinical, and neurodegenerative measures in autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Aging cell 2023-06-08

Although pathogenic variants in PSEN1 leading to autosomal-dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) are highly penetrant, substantial interindividual variability in the rates of cognitive decline and biomarker change are observed in ADAD. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

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

Management of neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia in clinical settings: recommendations from a multidisciplinary expert panel

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2014-03-17

Noncognitive neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) of dementia (aggression, agitation, depression, anxiety, delusions, hallucinations, apathy, disinhibition) affect individuals with dementia nearly universally across dementia stages and etiologies. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Frontotemporal dementia and parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17: a consensus conference. Conference Participants

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Annals of neurology 1997-06-01

We held an international consensus conference on frontotemporal dementia, behavioral disturbances, and parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17 to determine whether these are homogeneous or heterogeneous disorders, to agree on terminology, and to develop strategies for further research. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Characterizing Alzheimer's disease using a hypometabolic convergence index

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. NeuroImage 2011-01-27

This article introduces a hypometabolic convergence index (HCI) for the assessment of Alzheimer's disease (AD); compares it to other biological, cognitive and clinical measures; and demonstrates its promise to predict clinical decline in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients using data from the AD Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The measurement of cognition in large-scale cross-national surveys: lessons from the Health and Retirement Study International Network of Studies and the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. The Journals of Gerontology Series B 2025-10-16

These lessons emphasize the importance of ensuring tests are feasible across both high-income countries and LMICs, maintaining consistency within studies and over time, and designing comprehensive cognitive batteries for improved measurement precision of general and domain-specific phenotypes. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Predicting the progression of MCI and Alzheimer’s disease on structural brain integrity and other features with machine learning

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. GeroScience 2025-04-26

Machine learning (ML) on structural MRI data shows high potential for classifying Alzheimer's disease (AD) progression, but the specific contribution of brain regions, demographics, and proteinopathy remains unclear. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 568 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 31,780 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.

1,045 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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

Last updated