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 251–275 of 903 studies (page 11 of 37) · 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)

Showing 903 studies tagged small — clear

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.

Atypical antipsychotic drugs and risk of ischaemic stroke: population based retrospective cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 2005-01-24

Older adults with dementia who take atypical antipsychotics have a similar risk of ischaemic stroke to those taking typical antipsychotics. 1 key finding →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Large Perivascular Spaces Visible on Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cerebral Small Vessel Disease Progression, and Risk of Dementia: The Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility-Reykjavik Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2017-09-01

However, whether large perivascular spaces (L-PVSs) (>3 mm in diameter) visible on MRI are associated with SVD and cognitive deterioration in older individuals is unknown. 5 key findings →

Participants: 2,612 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Chronic kidney disease is associated with white matter hyperintensity volume: the Northern Manhattan Study (NOMAS)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Stroke 2007-10-25

The association between moderate-severe chronic kidney disease and white matter hyperintensity volume highlights the growing importance of kidney disease as a possible determinant of cerebrovascular disease and/or as a marker of microangiopathy. 5 key findings →

Participants: 615 Evidence: moderate

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

Association Between Life's Simple 7 and Noncardiovascular Disease: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Journal of the American Heart Association 2016-10-20

The American Heart Association's LS7 score identified individuals who were vulnerable to multiple chronic nonvascular conditions. 4 key findings →

Participants: 6,506 Evidence: low

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

The recommendations of a consensus panel for the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of neurogenic orthostatic hypotension and associated supine hypertension

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Journal of neurology 2017-01-03

Neurogenic orthostatic hypotension (nOH) is common in patients with neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease, multiple system atrophy, pure autonomic failure, dementia with Lewy bodies, and peripheral neuropathies including amyloid or diabetic neuropathy. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Phase lag index: assessment of functional connectivity from multi channel EEG and MEG with diminished bias from common sources

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Human brain mapping 2007-11-01

The PLI performed at least as well as the PC in detecting true changes in synchronization in model and real data but, at the same token and like-wise the IC, it was much less affected by the influence of common sources and active reference electrodes. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Cerebral microbleeds on MRI: prevalence, associations, and potential clinical implications

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

Cerebral microbleeds might indicate a higher risk of future intracerebral hemorrhage and may be a marker of cerebral small-vessel disease and cerebral amyloid angiopathy. 4 key findings →

Participants: 5,200 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Frontal lobe white matter hyperintensities and neurofibrillary pathology in the oldest old

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Neurology 2010-11-03

Our study showed an association between neurofibrillary pathology and frontal PVWMH and DWMH (rather than parietal), as a surrogate of small vessel disease, particularly in very old community-dwelling individuals. 5 key findings →

Participants: 132 Evidence: moderate

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

From across this tag

10 of the 902 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