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 153 studies with an author at Yale University (US) · free to read (page 6 of 7) · 31,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 153 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.

Association of Neighborhood‐Level Disadvantage with Cerebrovascular Disease Neuropathology in a National Sample of Brain Donors

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

We found that ∼25% of donors lived in high deprivation contexts, 52% had at least one incidence of CVD, and the cohort identified as .05). 3 key findings →

Participants: 7,187 Evidence: moderate

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

Alzheimer precursor protein interaction with the Nogo-66 receptor reduces amyloid-beta plaque deposition

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience 2006-02-01

Pathophysiologic hypotheses for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are centered on the role of the amyloid plaque Abeta peptide and the mechanism of its derivation from the amyloid precursor protein (APP). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The role of cortical connectivity in Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis: a review and model system

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 1993-01-01

Here we review current evidence in support of the cortical disconnection/cortical connectivity model of Alzheimer disease (AD) pathogenesis, a model which predicts that one of the first events in AD is damage to the entorhinal cortex and/or subiculum resulting in the disconnection of the hippocampal formation and neocortex, and the subsequent progression of the disease in a stepwise fashion along cortico-cortical connections. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Development and evaluation of a multiplexed mass spectrometry based assay for measuring candidate peptide biomarkers in Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) CSF

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Proteomics. Clinical applications 2015-04-24

These data provide potential insights into the biology of CSF in AD and MCI progression and provide a novel tool for AD researchers and clinicians working to improve diagnostic accuracy, evaluation of treatment efficacy, and early diagnosis. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Geographic Variation in One-Year Recurrent Ischemic Stroke Rates for Elderly Medicare Beneficiaries in the USA

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Neuroepidemiology 2010-01-01

The overall 1-year recurrent stroke rate was 9.4% among 895,916 ischemic stroke patients (mean age: 78 years; 56.6% women; 86.6% White, 9.7% Black and 1.2% Latino/Hispanic). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

How bereaved adult-children of parents with dementia use end-of-life caregiving experiences to inform their personal advance care planning

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. The Journals of Gerontology Series B 2026-05-20

Participants actively contemplated ACP following their parents' death, referring to their end-of-life caregiving experiences as guideposts for issues to anticipate and opportunities to enhance receipt of healthcare during serious illness or incapacitation. 5 key findings →

Participants: 32 Evidence: low

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

Diet and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. JACC CardioOncology 2025-08-29

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer remain the leading causes of mortality in the United States, where poor diet has surpassed smoking as the leading risk factor for death, and life expectancy has hit a plateau as CVD mortality has stagnated over the past decade. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Interaction between DNA methylation and neighborhood disadvantage may impact risk for cognitive decline among Mexican Americans enrolled in the Health and Aging Brain Study – Health Disparities (HABS‐HD) Cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2023-12-01

The lack of significant results for moderation effects of the targeted epigenetic markers in our pilot study were likely due to the small sample size. 5 key findings →

Participants: 812 Evidence: moderate

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

Does Neighborhood Disadvantage Moderate the Relationship between Apolipoprotein E Status and Cognitive Functioning?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

Environmental factors like neighborhood disadvantage are also associated with cognitive decline, however, few studies have integrated this with APOE research. 5 key findings →

Participants: 190 Evidence: low

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

Financial strain and depressive symptoms among parent‐child dyads coping with dementia, depression, or delirium

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia Behavior & Socioeconomics of Aging 2025-10-28

Study 1 showed that each person's financial strain was associated with their own greater depressive symptoms. 2 key findings →

Participants: 147 Evidence: low

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

Deep Learning Framework for Characterizing Tau‐PET Spatial Heterogeneity along AD Spectrum: A Self‐supervised Approach

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

Three robustly differentiated AD subtypes (S1, S2, and S3) were identified, with 93% validation accuracy and Adjusted Mutual Information scores >0.89, each exhibiting distinct tau patterns. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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

Deep Learning Framework for Characterizing Tau‐PET Spatial Heterogeneity along AD Spectrum: A Self‐supervised Approach

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

Three robustly differentiated AD subtypes (S1, S2, and S3) were identified, with 93% validation accuracy and Adjusted Mutual Information scores >0.89, each exhibiting distinct tau patterns. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional 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
  • 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