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.

Find studies

Showing 51–75 of 100 studies (page 3 of 4) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Showing 100 studies tagged axis — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

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.

Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis and Epilepsy: A Review on Mechanisms and Potential Therapeutics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Frontiers in immunology 2021-10-11

The gut-brain axis refers to the bidirectional communication between the gut and brain, and regulates intestinal homeostasis and the central nervous system via neural networks and neuroendocrine, immune, and inflammatory pathways. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The gut-brain axis describes a bidirectional interplay within the enteric environment between the intestinal epithelium, the mucosal immune system, and the microbiota with the enteric nervous system. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Introduction to the Special Issue "The Brain-Gut Axis"

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Cellular and molecular neurobiology 2021-10-15

This special Issue presents comprehensive and state-of-the-art advances in supporting the crucial role of the bidirectional interactions between the Brain-Gut Axis in health and diseases with an emphasis on the microbiome-gut-brain axis and its implications in variety of neurological disorders. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The intricate connection between central and enteric nervous systems is well established with emerging evidence linking gut microbiota function as a significant new contributor to gut-brain axis signaling. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Microbiota-gut-brain axis and ketogenic diet: how close are we to tackling epilepsy?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Microbiome research reports 2023-08-29

The microbiota-gut-brain axis refers to the intricate bidirectional communication between commensal microorganisms residing in the digestive tract and the central nervous system, along neuroendocrine, metabolic, immune, and inflammatory pathways. 5 key findings →

Design: narrative review Evidence: low

The gut microbiome plays a pivotal role in maintaining human health, with numerous studies demonstrating that alterations in microbial compositions can significantly affect the development and progression of various immune-mediated diseases affecting both the digestive tract and the central nervous system (CNS). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The intestinal barrier in disorders of the central nervous system

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology 2022-11-02

The intestinal barrier, which primarily consists of a mucus layer, an epithelial barrier, and a gut vascular barrier, has a crucial role in health and disease by facilitating nutrient absorption and preventing the entry of pathogens. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The human microbiota comprises trillions of symbiotic microorganisms and is involved in regulating gastrointestinal (GI), immune, nervous system and metabolic homeostasis. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Microbiota-Brain-Gut Axis and Neurodegenerative Diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Current neurology and neuroscience reports 2017-10-17

The purposes of this review were as follows: first, to provide an overview of the gut microbiota and its interactions with the gut and the central nervous system (the microbiota-gut-brain axis) in health, second, to review the relevance of this axis to the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson's disease, and, finally, to assess the potential for microbiota-targeted therapies. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Frailty, which is a syndrome that encompasses losses in physical, psychological and social domains, is responsible for enhanced vulnerability to endogenous and/or exogenous stressors. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 100 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.

↑ 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. Show only studies that are free to read

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