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 26–50 of 187 studies (page 2 of 8) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Showing 187 studies tagged networks — 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.

Cognitive resilience is an important modulating factor of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease, but the functional brain mechanisms that support cognitive resilience remain elusive. 4 key findings →

Participants: 108 Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive and intellectual deficits and behavior disturbance. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Cascading network failure across the Alzheimer's disease spectrum

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2015-11-19

The two main findings of this paper are (i) the posterior default mode network fails before measurable amyloid plaques and appears to initiate a connectivity cascade that continues throughout the disease spectrum; and (ii) high connectivity between the posterior default mode network and hubs of high connectivity (many located in the frontal lobe) is associated with amyloid accumulation. 2 key findings →

Participants: 128 Evidence: low

Group comparisons revealed significantly decreased within-network connectivity in salience-ventral attention, cognitive control, and default mode network in participants with postoperative delirium (n=31) compared with non-delirious participants (n=89; non-parametric permutation test, 1000 iterations, P<0.05). 5 key findings →

Participants: 31 Evidence: low

Both DELPHI analysis of network function and DTI analysis detected a significant decrease in connectivity, excitability, and WM integrity in the SCD group compared to healthy control (HC) subjects; a significant decrease was also noted for aMCI and Dementia groups compared to HC. 3 key findings →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

Discrimination of disease-related interactions of the core subsystem and FPN was found in AD-spectrum patients, which was the neural circuit fundamental to plasma NFL disrupting cognitive integrity. 3 key findings →

Participants: 112 Evidence: low

Four Distinct Subtypes of Alzheimer's Disease Based on Resting-State Connectivity Biomarkers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Biological psychiatry 2022-06-26

Individuals with AD were clustered into 4 subtypes reproducibly, which included those with 1) diffuse and mild functional connectivity disruption (subtype 1), 2) predominantly decreased connectivity in the default mode network accompanied by an increase in the prefrontal circuit (subtype 2), 3) predominantly decreased connectivity in the anterior cingulate cortex accompanied by an increase in prefrontal cortex connectivity (subtype 3), and 4) predominantly decreased connectivity in the basal ganglia accompanied by an increase in prefrontal cortex connectivity (subtype 4). 3 key findings →

Participants: 809 Evidence: low

In Alzheimer's disease, tau pathology spreads hierarchically from the inferior temporal lobe throughout the cortex, ensuing cognitive decline and dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 55 Evidence: low

Networks of tau distribution in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2018-02-01

Second, to investigate if regions of high tau burden are associated with functional connectivity networks, we extracted the region with the maximum z-value in each of the generated tau pathology networks and used them as seeds in a subsequent resting-state functional MRI analysis, conducted in a group of healthy adults (n = 26) who were part of the 1000 Functional Connectomes Project. 4 key findings →

Participants: 26 Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease is increasingly considered a large-scale network disconnection syndrome, associated with progressive aggregation of pathological proteins, cortical atrophy, and functional disconnections between brain regions. 4 key findings →

Participants: 49 Evidence: low

The FC between the retrosplenial (RSC) and parahippocampal cortices (PHC) was the earliest affected FC, while a manifest SC change in the ventral cingulum and fornix was observed in the later ADD stage. 4 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

The disruption of functional connectivity is one of the early events that occurs in the brains of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 2 key findings →

Participants: 32 Evidence: low

Resting-state fMRI as a biomarker for Alzheimer's disease?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2012-03-15

Previous work indicates that resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is sensitive to functional brain changes related to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology across the clinical spectrum. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

Neuropathological studies have shown that the typical neurofibrillary pathology of hyperphosphorylated tau protein in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) preferentially affects specific brain regions whereas others remain relatively spared. 5 key findings →

Participants: 44 Evidence: low

With decreasing local and global connectivity parameters, the large-scale functional brain network organization in AD deviates from the optimal 'small-world' network structure towards a more 'random' type. 5 key findings →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

Music, memory and mechanisms in Alzheimer’s disease: Figure 1

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Brain 2015-07-23

These same brain areas were then assessed in a cohort of patients with Alzheimer’s disease versus a healthy older reference group, using a region of interest approach combined with standard structural (MRI), metabolic (fluorodeoxyglucose-PET) and amyloid ligand (florbetapir-PET) neuroimaging. 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

From across this tag

9 of the 187 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 9. The same 9 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