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

30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 576–600 of 607 studies in Neurology · free to read (page 24 of 25) · 30,980 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these 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; 16,452 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.

Elevated cerebrospinal fluid total tau in former professional athletes with multiple concussions

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Neurology 2019-05-08

Concentrations of phosphorylated tau181, total tau (t-tau), and β-amyloid in the CSF were measured in 3 groups: 22 former professional athletes with multiple concussions (mean ± SD age 55.9 ± 12.2 years), 5 healthy controls (age 57.4 ± 5.2 years), and 12 participants (age 60.0 ± 6.6 years) diagnosed with Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 12 Evidence: low

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

Time Course and Severity of Cognitive Changes as a Function of Aβ Positivity and APOE Genotype in Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Neurology 2025-06-27

We analyzed data from 1,542 participants (mean age = 72.2 years, SD = 7.2; 50.8% female; mean education = 16.3 years, SD = 2.6) and found that APOE4 was associated with steeper declines in episodic memory as a function of Aβ duration. 5 key findings →

Participants: 1,542 Evidence: low

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

Mapping the Association of Cerebral Small Vessel Disease, Gray Matter Integrity, and Cognitive Function

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Neurology 2025-10-17

= 0.026). Complementing previous research that focuses on CSVD and white matter changes, our study highlights abnormal gray matter integrity as a possible link between small vessel pathology and cognitive disorders. 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

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

An evaluation of the predictive validity and inter-rater reliability of clinical diagnostic criteria for senile dementia of Lewy body type

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Neurology 1994-05-01

Several recent autopsy studies suggest that senile dementia of Lewy body type (SDLT) may be the second most common neuropathologic cause of dementia in the elderly, accounting for 7 to 30% of all cases. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

In vivo [18F]-AV-1451 tau-PET imaging in sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Neurology 2018-02-07

In vivo [ 18 F]-AV-1451 PET neuroimaging was performed in 5 patients with sporadic CJD (median age, 66 years [63-74]), and results were compared to cognitively normal (CN) persons (n = 44; median age, 68 years [63-74]) and to participants with very mild Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia (n = 8; median age, 77 years [63-90]). 4 key findings →

Participants: 44 Evidence: low

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

Can MRI screen for CSF biomarkers in neurodegenerative disease?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Neurology 2012-12-26

Alzheimer disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) may have overlapping clinical presentations despite distinct underlying neuropathologies, thus making in vivo diagnosis challenging. 4 key findings →

Participants: 185 Evidence: low

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

Differential neurocognitive network perturbation in amnestic and aphasic Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Neurology 2020-01-22

Despite the presumptive common underlying neuropathology of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles, the 2 groups displayed 2 different patterns of network perturbation, each concordant with the clinical presentation and the anatomy of neurodegeneration. 2 key findings →

Participants: 14 Evidence: low

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

Reduced medial temporal lobe N-acetylaspartate in cognitively impaired but nondemented patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Neurology 2005-01-01

Because NAA is considered a marker of neuronal integrity, reduced medial temporal and parietal lobe NAA could be an early indication of dementia-related pathology in elderly individuals. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Association Between Alzheimer Pathology, Sleep, and Cognition in Patients With Late-Onset Unexplained Epilepsy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Neurology 2026-08-31

= 0.032). In individuals with LOUE, elevated plasma p-tau217 was associated with both cognitive impairment and disrupted sleep microarchitecture, with the most pronounced cognitive deficits observed in individuals with medication refractory epilepsy. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

What Does a Positive Alzheimer Disease Blood-Based Biomarker Result Mean in People With Mild Cognitive Impairment?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Neurology 2026-05-04

Blood-based biomarkers (BBMs) for Alzheimer disease (AD) offer widely expanded access to biomarker-informed diagnoses in community settings that have previously lacked such resources. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Eating behavior in frontotemporal dementia: Peripheral hormones vs hypothalamic pathology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Neurology 2015-09-16

In bvFTD, they are in part related to hypothalamic degeneration, with potential disintegration of the network connections between the hypothalamus and orbitofrontal cortex/reward pathways. 1 key finding →

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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.

1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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