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

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 3,526–3,550 of 10,985 studies · free to read (page 142 of 440) · 27,380 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; 12,859 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.

Operationalizing diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer's disease and other age-related cognitive impairment-Part 2

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2011-01-01

This article focuses on the effects of operational differences in case ascertainment on estimates of prevalence and incidence of cognitive impairment and/or dementia of the Alzheimer type. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

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

Subjective complaints precede Parkinson disease: the rotterdam study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2006-01-09

Neuronal degeneration and dopamine loss in the preclinical phase of Parkinson disease may produce subtle complaints before clinically recognizable symptoms emerge. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 6,038 Evidence: moderate

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

Association of social isolation, loneliness and genetic risk with incidence of dementia: UK Biobank Cohort Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. BMJ open 2022-02-23

Social isolation and loneliness have been associated with increased risk of dementia, but it is not known whether this risk is modified or confounded by genetic risk of dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 70 Evidence: low

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

Deep Learning-Based Classification and Voxel-Based Visualization of Frontotemporal Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in neuroscience 2021-01-21

Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) have overlapping symptoms, and accurate differential diagnosis is important for targeted intervention and treatment. 4 key findings →

Participants: 4,099 Evidence: moderate

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

Association of CSF Aβ38 Levels With Risk of Alzheimer Disease-Related Decline

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Neurology 2021-12-22

Experimental studies suggest that the balance between short and long β-amyloid (Aβ) species might modulate the toxic effects of Aβ in Alzheimer disease (AD), but clinical evidence is lacking. 4 key findings →

Participants: 656 Evidence: moderate

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

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy and Alzheimer disease - one peptide, two pathways

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2019-12-11

The shared role of amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) and Alzheimer disease (AD) is arguably the clearest instance of crosstalk between neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular processes. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy in the elderly

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2011-12-01

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) results from deposition of β-amyloid in the media and adventitia of small arteries and capillaries of the leptomeninges and cerebral cortex and is a major cause of lobar intracerebral hemorrhage and cognitive impairment in the elderly. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Microglial neuroinflammation contributes to tau accumulation in chronic traumatic encephalopathy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica communications 2016-10-28

The chronic effects of repetitive head impacts (RHI) on the development of neuroinflammation and its relationship to chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) are unknown. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Detection Rates of Mild Cognitive Impairment in Primary Care for the United States Medicare Population

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease 2023-10-26

The average detection rates for mild cognitive impairment is 0.08 (interquartile range=0.00-0.02) for both clinicians and practices, suggesting that only about 8% of expected cases were diagnosed on average. 3 key findings →

Participants: 25 Evidence: low

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

Dementia diagnosis and utilization patterns in a racially diverse population within an integrated health care delivery system

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions 2022-01-01

ADRD prevalence was 5.5%. A total of 25,278 individuals had an incident ADRD code (rate: 1.2%) over the study period-nearly half during a hospital-based encounter. 5 key findings →

Participants: 25,278 Evidence: moderate

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

Introduction to Special Issue: Translational Research on Pain and Pain Management in Later Life

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2023-12-01

Prevalence studies indicate that as many as 50% of older adults experience bothersome pain on a regular basis (Dahlhamer et al., 2018; Galicia-Castillo & Weiner, 2023; Larsson et al., 2017; Lin et al., 2020; Rikard et al., 2023). 5 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,041 Evidence: high

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

Racial, ethnic and neighborhood socioeconomic differences in incidence of dementia: A regional retrospective cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2023-03-16

Increasing neighborhood disadvantage was associated with increased risk of EHR-documented dementia diagnosis or dementia-related death (most vs. least disadvantaged ADI quintile HR = 1.76, 95% confidence interval = 1.69-1.84) after adjusting for age and sex. 4 key findings →

Participants: 253,421 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.

1,032 records (3.8% 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