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

28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–25 of 61 studies in Frontiers in Neurology · free to read (page 1 of 3) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 61 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.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 13,658 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.

Plasma p-tau181 Level Predicts Neurodegeneration and Progression to Alzheimer's Dementia: A Longitudinal Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2021-09-07

Plasma-based biomarkers would be potential biomarkers for early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) because they are more available and cost-effective than cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or neuroimaging. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 185 Evidence: moderate

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

Digital biomarkers for early agitation detection in dementia: a scoping review of emerging wearable and smart technologies for personalized care

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Frontiers in Neurology 2026-02-10

The reviewed studies demonstrated that wearable sensors, particularly those employing multimodal data and personalized machine learning models, enable reliable detection of agitation symptoms and support timely, tailored interventions. 5 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

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

Beta Amyloid Deposition Is Not Associated With Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2019-04-24

The extent to which Alzheimer neuropathology, particularly the accumulation of misfolded beta-amyloid, contributes to cognitive decline and dementia in Parkinson's disease (PD) is unresolved. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 23 Evidence: low

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

The predictive validity of a Brain Care Score for dementia and stroke: data from the UK Biobank cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2023-12-01

The 21-point Brain Care Score (BCS) was developed through a modified Delphi process in partnership with practitioners and patients to promote behavior changes and lifestyle choices in order to sustainably reduce the risk of dementia and stroke. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Basal Forebrain Volume, but Not Hippocampal Volume, Is a Predictor of Global Cognitive Decline in Patients With Alzheimer's Disease Treated With Cholinesterase Inhibitors

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2018-08-14

Predicting the progression of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important for treatment selection and patient counseling. 4 key findings →

Participants: 124 Evidence: moderate

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

A Novel Ensemble-Based Machine Learning Algorithm to Predict the Conversion From Mild Cognitive Impairment to Alzheimer's Disease Using Socio-Demographic Characteristics, Clinical Information, and Neuropsychological Measures

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2019-07-16

The final algorithm demonstrated an AUROC of 0.88, sensitivity of 77.7%, and a specificity of 79.9% on excluded test data. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Optical Coherence Tomography in Alzheimer's Disease and Other Neurodegenerative Diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2017-12-19

Over the past decade, a surge of evidence has documented various pathological processes in the retina of patients suffering from mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), and other neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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

Dysphagia in older adults with mild cognitive impairment and dementia through fluoroscopic study with barium swallow in a memory clinic

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Frontiers in Neurology 2025-01-15

Our findings highlight the altered phases of swallowing in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 158 Evidence: low

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

Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities With Anti-amyloid Antibodies for the Treatment of Dementia Due to Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2022-03-23

Second-generation anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies are emerging as a viable therapeutic option for individuals with prodromal and mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Key motor and non-motor features in early dementia with Lewy bodies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Frontiers in Neurology 2025-03-13

Early-stage DLB closely resembles PD in motor symptoms but has more neuropsychiatric non-motor symptoms compared to PD and overall non-motor symptoms than AD. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 107 Evidence: low

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

A nomogram for predicting post-stroke cognitive impairment no dementia in patients with first-ever mild ischemic stroke

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Frontiers in Neurology 2025-08-19

This validated nomogram incorporating clinical, biochemical, and neuroimaging biomarkers provides a robust tool for individualized PSCIND risk assessment in first-ever MIS patients, with potential to guide targeted interventions and cognitive monitoring. 2 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 137 Evidence: moderate

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

Summary of the best evidence for non-pharmaceutical interventions for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Frontiers in Neurology 2025-07-03

Thirteen studies were included (five guidelines, two clinical decisions, two systematic reviews, one meta-analysis, and three RCTs). 3 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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

Cerebral microbleeds: a review of clinical, genetic, and neuroimaging associations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2014-01-06

Cerebral microbleeds (microbleeds) are small, punctuate hypointense lesions seen in T2* Gradient-Recall Echo (GRE) and Susceptibility-Weighted (SWI) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) sequences, corresponding to areas of hemosiderin breakdown products from prior microscopic hemorrhages. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Emerging Putative Associations between Non-Coding RNAs and Protein-Coding Genes in Neuropathic Pain: Added Value from Reusing Microarray Data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Frontiers in neurology 2016-10-18

Regeneration of injured nerves is likely occurring in the peripheral nervous system, but not in the central nervous system. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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

Detecting amyloid and tau pathology in Parkinson’s disease, 4R-tauopathies and control subjects with plasma pTau217

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Frontiers in Neurology 2025-08-15

Plasma pTau217 levels serve as a scalable, non-invasive marker of AD-pathology across Lewy body diseases, PSP/CBS, and MCI/CU populations. 2 key findings →

Participants: 18 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 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