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 2,301–2,325 of 10,985 studies · free to read (page 93 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.

The role of the medial prefrontal cortex in cognition, ageing and dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Brain communications 2021-06-11

Although, anatomical disparities of the rodent medial prefrontal cortex compared to the primate homologue are apparent, current rodent models have effectively implicated the medial prefrontal cortex as a neural substrate of cognitive decline within ageing and dementia. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

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

Trends in Relative Incidence and Prevalence of Dementia Across Non-Hispanic Black and White Individuals in the United States, 2000-2016

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2021-03-01

This study did not find evidence to suggest that the ratio of dementia risk across Black and White individuals changed in the US between 2000 and 2016. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

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

Prevalence of post-stroke cognitive impairment in china: a community-based, cross-sectional study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. PloS one 2015-04-13

International hospital-based studies have indicated a high risk of cognitive impairment after stroke, evidence from community-based studies in China is scarce. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 599 Evidence: low

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

Secular Trends in Dementia and Cognitive Impairment of U.S. Rural and Urban Older Adults

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. American journal of preventive medicine 2017-12-12

Larger gains in rural adults' cognitive functioning between 2000 and 2010 that are linked with increased educational attainment demonstrate long-term public health benefits of investment in secondary education. 4 key findings →

Participants: 16,386 Evidence: low

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

Effects of education and race on cognitive decline: An integrative study of generalizability versus study-specific results

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Psychology and aging 2015-11-02

The objective of the study was to examine variability across multiple prospective cohort studies in level and rate of cognitive decline by race/ethnicity and years of education. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 4,115 Evidence: moderate

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

Pittsburgh compound B imaging and cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β in a multicentre European memory clinic study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2016-07-07

The aim of this study was to assess the agreement between data on cerebral amyloidosis, derived using Pittsburgh compound B positron emission tomography and (i) multi-laboratory INNOTEST enzyme linked immunosorbent assay derived cerebrospinal fluid concentrations of amyloid-β42; (ii) centrally measured cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β42 using a Meso Scale Discovery enzyme linked immunosorbent assay; and (iii) cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β42 centrally measured using an antibody-independent mass spectrometry-based reference method. 3 key findings →

Participants: 243 Evidence: low

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

Relationship Between Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Cognitive Change in a Multiethnic Elderly Cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2015-06-11

The rate of cognitive change in elderly persons with and without diabetes mellitus is similar, although cognitive performance is poorer in persons with diabetes mellitus. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 1,493 Evidence: moderate

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

Prevalence of cerebral white matter lesions in elderly people: a population based magnetic resonance imaging study. The Rotterdam Scan Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry 2001-01-01

The prevalence and the degree of cerebral white matter lesions increased with age. 2 key findings →

Participants: 1,077 Evidence: low

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

Recalibrating the epigenetic clock: implications for assessing biological age in the human cortex

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2020-12-01

Human DNA methylation data have been used to develop biomarkers of ageing, referred to as 'epigenetic clocks', which have been widely used to identify differences between chronological age and biological age in health and disease including neurodegeneration, dementia and other brain phenotypes. 2 key findings →

Participants: 1,397 Evidence: low

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

Machine learning prediction of incidence of Alzheimer's disease using large-scale administrative health data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. NPJ digital medicine 2020-03-26

Nationwide population-based cohort provides a new opportunity to build an automated risk prediction model based on individuals' history of health and healthcare beyond existing risk prediction models. 1 key finding →

Participants: 40,736 Evidence: moderate

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

Declines in Connected Language Are Associated with Very Early Mild Cognitive Impairment: Results from the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2018-01-09

Changes to everyday spoken language ("connected language") are evident in persons with AD dementia, yet little is known about when these changes are first detectable on the continuum of cognitive decline. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 264 Evidence: moderate

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

Sensor-derived physical activity parameters can predict future falls in people with dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Gerontology 2014-08-28

Surprisingly, fallers and non-fallers did not differ on any conventional assessment (p = 0.069-0.991), except for 'previous faller' (p = 0.006). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 77 Evidence: moderate

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

Unsupervised Machine Learning to Identify High Likelihood of Dementia in Population-Based Surveys: Development and Validation Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Journal of medical Internet research 2018-07-09

Unsupervised machine learning identifies high likelihood of dementia in population-based surveys, even without cognitive and behavioral measures and without the need of clinical diagnosis of dementia in a subsample of the population. 2 key findings →

Participants: 18,165 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