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 1–25 of 229 studies (page 1 of 10) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Showing 229 studies tagged blood-brain-barrier — 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.

Forty-four participants were recruited between September 2019 and June 2022. 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

These results indicate a strong association between WMH and MCH, a common manifestation of cerebral amyloid angiopathy and ARIA-H. These results suggest that increased WMH volume may represent an early sign of vessel amyloidosis, likely prior to the emergence of MCH. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high

Enlarged perivascular spaces and plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio in older adults without dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2023-04-14

Dilation of perivascular spaces (PVS) in the brain may indicate poor fluid drainage due to the accumulation of perivascular cell debris, waste, and proteins, including amyloid-beta (Aβ). 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 56 Evidence: moderate

Alzheimer's disease pathology (Aβ plaques, neurofibrillary tangles, and cerebral amyloid angiopathy) was significantly higher in the dMCI group than the sMCI group. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 28 Evidence: moderate

Patients with AD have altered microvascular network in the retina (narrower retinal venules and a sparser and more tortuous retinal vessels) compared with matched nondemented controls. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 136 Evidence: moderate

White matter hyperintensities (WMH) - - areas of increased signal appearing on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging - - are associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) risk and progression in late onset and genetic forms. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Atraumatic convexal subarachnoid hemorrhage (cSAH) in elderly patients is a rare entity that has been associated with cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) and intracerebral hematomas (ICH). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate

We found non-significant differences in age (F(2, 141) = 1.304; P = 0.275) and years of education (F(2, 141) = 0.013; P = 0.987). 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 29 Evidence: moderate

Quantitative Water Permeability Mapping of Blood-Brain-Barrier Dysfunction in Aging

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2022-04-08

Blood-brain-barrier (BBB) dysfunction is a hallmark of aging and aging-related disorders, including cerebral small vessel disease and Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 30 Evidence: moderate

Verubecestat is a potent BACE1 enzyme inhibitor currently being investigated in Phase III trials for the treatment of mild-to-moderate and prodromal Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is one of the major types of cerebral small vessel disease, and a leading cause of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage and cognitive decline in elderly patients. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

The SVCI group showed lower CD in the temporal quadrant of the RPC network compared to the CN group (mean (SD), 42.34 (6.29) vs 48.45 (7.08); p = 0.001). 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 69 Evidence: low

β-blockers that easily cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB) seem to diminish the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD), hypothetically facilitating waste clearance. 3 key findings →

Participants: 216 Evidence: low

CAA-PRS was significantly associated with pathological CAA (OR = 1.766, p < 0.001), with an AUC of 0.783 overall and 0.766 (OR = 1.780, p = 0.002) in those with high amyloid burden. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

A total of 124 participants with Alzheimer disease, cerebrovascular disease, or a mix Alzheimer's and cerebrovascular diseases and 55 controlparticipants underwent magnetic resonance imaging and neuropsychological testing. 5 key findings →

Participants: 124 Evidence: low

Blood-brain barrier opening in Alzheimer's disease using MR-guided focused ultrasound

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Nature communications 2018-07-25

Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound in combination with intravenously injected microbubbles has been shown to transiently open the blood-brain barrier, and reduce beta-amyloid and tau pathology in animal models of Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

FUS-enhanced delivery of AAV resulted in a 12.6% knockdown of APOE ε4 gene expression in the targeted hippocampus, accompanied by an over 20% decrease in apoE4 protein levels and significant reductions in astrocyte and microglia levels. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 229 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