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

27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 76–100 of 317 studies published 2012 · free to read (page 4 of 13) · 27,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 317 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; 13,259 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.

The problem with "problem behaviors": a systematic review of the association between individual patient behavioral and psychological symptoms and caregiver depression and burden within the dementia patient-caregiver dyad

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. International psychogeriatrics 2012-05-22

The evidence is not conclusive as to whether some symptoms are more important than others. 3 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

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

Distinct clinical and pathological characteristics of frontotemporal dementia associated with C9ORF72 mutations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2012-02-02

There was, as expected, a significant association between C9ORF72 mutations and presence of motor neuron disease. 5 key findings →

Participants: 398 Evidence: moderate

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

Executive function and falls in older adults: new findings from a five-year prospective study link fall risk to cognition

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. PloS one 2012-06-29

Survival analyses indicated that subjects with the lowest EF scores were more likely to fall sooner and more likely to experience multiple falls during the 66 months of follow-up (p Conclusions/significance These findings demonstrate that among community-living older adults, the risk of future falls was predicted by performance on EF and attention tests conducted 5 years earlier. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Development and assessment of a composite score for memory in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Brain imaging and behavior 2012-12-01

We sought to develop and evaluate a composite memory score from the neuropsychological battery used in the Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Amyloid deposition, hypometabolism, and longitudinal cognitive decline

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2012-10-01

Using data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) population, we examined (1) cross-sectional relationships between amyloid deposition, hypometabolism, and cognition, and (2) associations between amyloid and hypometabolism measurements and longitudinal cognitive measurements. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

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

Increased risk of cognitive and functional decline in patients with atrial fibrillation: results of the ONTARGET and TRANSCEND studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 2012-02-27

The role of atrial fibrillation in cognitive impairment and dementia, independent of stroke, is uncertain. 4 key findings →

Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 31,506 Evidence: high

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

Personality factors moderate the associations between apolipoprotein genotype and cognitive function as well as late onset Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry 2012-12-01

Phenotypic personality dimensions, primarily neuroticism and extraversion, moderate the relationship between APOE [Latin Small Letter Open E]-4 genotype and cognitive outcomes among older adults. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

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

Diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease: Movement Disorder Society Task Force guidelines

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society 2012-01-24

Mild cognitive impairment is common in nondemented Parkinson's disease (PD) patients and may be a harbinger of dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

The Beijing version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment as a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment: a community-based study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. BMC psychiatry 2012-09-25

In general, the MoCA-BJ is an acceptable tool for MCI screening in both urban and rural regions of Beijing. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 115 Evidence: low

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

Frontotemporal dementia with the C9ORF72 hexanucleotide repeat expansion: clinical, neuroanatomical and neuropathological features

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2012-03-01

The neuroimaging profile of the C9ORF72 expansion was significantly more symmetrical than progranulin mutations with significantly less temporal lobe involvement than microtubule-associated protein tau mutations. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Predicting future clinical changes of MCI patients using longitudinal and multimodal biomarkers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. PloS one 2012-03-22

Accurate prediction of clinical changes of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients, including both qualitative change (i.e., conversion to Alzheimer's disease (AD)) and quantitative change (i.e., cognitive scores) at future time points, is important for early diagnosis of AD and for monitoring the disease progression. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Mild cognitive impairment in a community sample: the Sydney Memory and Ageing Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2012-10-27

Incidence rates for MCI are higher than previously reported, particularly in men and for single-domain MCI; rates for amnestic and nonamnestic MCI were comparable. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Retinopathy and risk of dementia: the Rotterdam Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Neurology 2012-07-11

We investigated the associations between retinopathy and dementia and its subtypes Alzheimer disease (AD) and vascular dementia both cross-sectionally and prospectively in the Rotterdam Study, a large population-based cohort study. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 195 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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