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 1–23 of 23 studies in Brain scans and imaging · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Showing 23 studies tagged examination — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

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

What “Brain scans and imaging” covers

Brain scans and imaging — MRI, PET and other scans: what they show, how early, and how reliably.

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.

In this study, lower AD signature region volumes, brain microhemorrhages, higher WMH volumes, and infarcts were risk factors associated with dementia in older community-based residents. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 1,553 Evidence: moderate

Default mode network connectivity in stable vs progressive mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. Neurology 2011-01-12

GOF indices were highest in normal controls, intermediate in MCI, and lowest in AD (p Conclusions fMRI connectivity indices distinguish patients with MCI who undergo cognitive decline and conversion to AD from those who remain stable over a 2- to 3-year follow-up period. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 68 Evidence: moderate

Hippocampal and entorhinal atrophy in mild cognitive impairment: prediction of Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100. Neurology 2007-03-01

Hippocampal and entorhinal cortex volumes were each largest in controls, intermediate in MCI nonconverters, and smallest in MCI converters to AD (37 of 139 patients converted to AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 139 Evidence: low

The contribution of voxel-based morphometry in staging patients with mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Neurology 2006-08-01

Different patterns of gray matter density distribution in patients with mild cognitive impairment may be associated to different rates of conversion to Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →

Participants: 22 Evidence: low

Concluding, this innovative EEG analysis, in combination with a genetic test (both low-cost and widely available), could evaluate on an individual basis with great precision the risk of MCI progression. 3 key findings →

Participants: 97 Evidence: low

Brain structural alterations before mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Neurology 2007-04-01

Structural brain changes in anatomic areas involved in higher cognitive processes precede clinical signs and symptoms in longitudinally followed normal subjects destined to develop mild cognitive impairment. 1 key finding →

Participants: 23 Evidence: low

MRI patterns of atrophy associated with progression to AD in amnestic mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Neurology 2007-09-26

The regions of loss observed in subjects with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) who progressed to Alzheimer disease (AD) within 18 months of the MRI are typical of subjects with AD. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

DWI predicts future progression to Alzheimer disease in amnestic mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neurology 2005-03-01

The authors assessed whether measures of hippocampal water diffusivity at baseline can predict future progression to Alzheimer disease (AD) in amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Microstructural white matter changes in cognitively normal individuals at risk of amnestic MCI

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neurology 2012-07-25

Microstructural white matter changes are present in cognitively normal individuals in the pre-aMCI stage, and may serve as a potential imaging marker of early AD-related brain changes. 1 key finding →

Participants: 193 Evidence: low

Effect of acupuncture in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease: a functional MRI study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. PloS one 2012-08-20

We aim to clarify the mechanisms of acupuncture in treating mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD) by using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Anxiety symptoms in aMCI predict conversion to AD, over and beyond the effects of depression, memory loss, or atrophy within AD neuroimaging biomarkers. 3 key findings →

Participants: 376 Evidence: low

In subjects with aMCI poor global cognitive performance at baseline, the worsening on executive functions and on functional status but not the worsening on memory functions are independently associated with the conversion to dementia of Alzheimer type at 1 year, follow-up. 3 key findings →

Participants: 40 Evidence: low

Spatial cognition and the human navigation network in AD and MCI

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Neurology 2007-09-01

The navigation disability in Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) involves a selective impairment of spatial cognition and is associated with atrophy of the right-lateralized navigation network. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Moreover, cognitive correlations with topological network properties suggest their potential use as markers to assess the risk of Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →

Participants: 18 Evidence: low

Disrupted modular brain dynamics reflect cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. NeuroImage 2011-11-30

The relation between pathology and cognitive dysfunction in dementia is still poorly understood, although disturbed communication between different brain regions is almost certainly involved. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The authors' findings suggest that the effectiveness of explicit-memory training in patients with MCI is associated with training-specific increases in activation and connectivity in a distributed neural system that includes areas involved in explicit memory. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The fMRI entropy classifier matched the tau PET model in accuracy and outperformed it in F1 score (0.64 vs. 0.61) and area under the curve (AUC; 0.73 vs. 0.67). 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Structural, Functional and Cognitive Validation of a Deep-Learning MCI-to-AD Conversion Model in OASIS-3

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-10

BackgroundDeep-learning models predict mild cognitive impairment (MCI)-to-Alzheimers disease (AD) conversion from structural MRI with high accuracy. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 40 Evidence: moderate

↑ 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