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 8,776–8,800 of 10,985 studies · free to read (page 352 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.

EEG SIGNAL ANALYSIS FOR CLASSIFYING ALZHEIMER’S AND FRONTOTEMPORAL DEMENTIA DISORDERS USING ENSEMBLE METHODS

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. International Journal of Advances in Signal and Image Sciences 2025-06-30

Accurate identification of neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and Frontotemporal Dementia (FTD), is crucial for prompt medical intervention. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Current strategies in the management of dementia with lewy bodies and future directions based on disease pathophysiology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Molecular Neurodegeneration 2025-07-01

Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is thought to be the second most common form of dementia after Alzheimer’s disease, and is characterised by a combination of cognitive, neuropsychiatric and motor symptoms. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Targeting CB2 receptor with a novel antagonist reverses cognitive decline, neurodegeneration and pyroptosis in a TAU-dependent frontotemporal dementia mouse model

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Brain Behavior and Immunity 2025-03-11

• The new CB 2 antagonist PGN36 is able to cross the Blood-Brain Barrier. • PGN36 treatment effectively alleviates TAU P301L -induced cognitive decline . • PGN36 is able to reduce TAU protein expression levels and restore synaptic plasticity. • PGN36 modulates TAU P301L -induced pyroptosis. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Understanding basic and social emotions in Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Frontiers in Psychology 2025-02-07

FTD patients performed significantly worse than HCs in most of the subtests of the basic emotion recognition batteries, where, instead, AD patients were significantly impaired only when required to match emotional facial expression in different individuals (subtask of the FERB). 5 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

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

The experience of “at‐risk” status for familial frontotemporal dementia (fFTD) and its impact on reproductive decision‐making: A qualitative study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Journal of Genetic Counseling 2025-01-12

Familial frontotemporal dementia (fFTD) is an autosomal dominant heritable form of FTD, onsetting in mid-life, characterized by behavioral and personality changes. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Executive dysfunction relates to salience network desegregation in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. NeuroImage Clinical 2025-01-01

• Executive dysfunction is a key characteristic of bvFTD. • Network de-differentiation reflects loss of specialized networks. • De-differentiation of the salience network relates to executive dysfunction in bvFTD. • Reduced network capacity for specialized processing may mediate emergence of executive dysfunction. 5 key findings →

Participants: 90 Evidence: low

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

Neural deterioration and compensation in visual short‐term memory among individuals with amnestic mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-01-17

Among the atrophic brain regions in aMCI, VSTM performance correlated with the volume of the right prefrontal cortex (PFC) but not the medial temporal lobe (MTL), and this correlation was mainly present in patients with greater MTL atrophy. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Posterior cingulate cortex microRNA dysregulation differentiates cognitive resilience, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-02-01

We identified specific miRNA groups, mRNA targets, and signaling pathways distinguishing AD, MCI, resilience, ante mortem neuropsychological test performance, post mortem neuropathological burden, and AD risk. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Exploration of working memory retrieval stage for mild cognitive impairment: time-varying causality analysis of electroencephalogram based on dynamic brain networks

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2025-03-13

Our results showed that: (a) Behavioral data analysis: there were significant differences in accuracy and accuracy / reaction time between MCI and NC in tasks with memory load capacity of low load-four and high load-six, especially in tasks with memory load capacity of four. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Comprehensive Anatomical Staging Predicts Clinical Progression in Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Data-Driven Approach

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2025-06-09

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) presents significant challenges in clinical practice due to its heterogeneous manifestation and variable progression rates. 3 key findings →

Participants: 504 Evidence: low

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

Linking oxysterols and different stages of mild cognitive impairment: insights from gut metabolites and N6-methyladenosine

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Alzheimer s Research & Therapy 2025-05-13

EMCIs and LMCIs, especially LMCIs, exhibited poorer performance in almost all global and multidimensional cognitive tests. 5 key findings →

Participants: 35 Evidence: low

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

Alterations in gut microbiota and plasma metabolites: a multi-omics study of mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Frontiers in Neuroscience 2025-12-01

Our multi-omics study revealed distinct gut microbiota and metabolite alterations in PD patients with cognitive impairment, highlighting gut-brain axis dysfunction. 5 key findings →

Participants: 100 Evidence: moderate

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

Integrative multi‐omics analysis reveals physiological and genetic drivers of CSF biomarker variability: implications in neurodegeneration studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

We estimated the overall concentration (mean standardized values) and principal components (PCs) of the proteomics and lipidomics data independently. 5 key findings →

Participants: 1,372 Evidence: moderate

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

The relationship of 18 F-FDG-PET to other common biomarkers of dementia in a clinical cohort with memory deficits

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer s Disease Reports 2025-04-16

The study highlights the potential of integrating 18 F-FDG-PET with CSF biomarkers to improve the diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of AD, emphasizing the complexity and regional specificity of biomarker interactions in neurodegeneration. 1 key finding →

Participants: 90 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
  • 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