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 26 studies by Alcolea D (page 1 of 2) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

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.

Diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease using plasma biomarkers adjusted to clinical probability

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100. Nature aging 2024-11-12

Recently approved anti-amyloid immunotherapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) require evidence of amyloid-β pathology from positron emission tomography (PET) or cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) before initiating treatment. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 6,896 Evidence: moderate

APOE4 homozygozity represents a distinct genetic form of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100. Nature medicine 2024-05-06

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of APOE4 homozygosity on Alzheimer's disease (AD) by examining its clinical, pathological and biomarker changes to see whether APOE4 homozygotes constitute a distinct, genetically determined form of AD. 2 key findings →

Participants: 3,297 Evidence: low

The diagnostic performance of plasma biomarkers was poor (area under the curve [AUC] between 0·53 [95% CI 0·44-0·62] and 0·74 [0·66-0·82]) except for plasma NfL concentrations, which had an AUC of 0·88 (0·82-0·93) for the differentiation of the asymptomatic group versus the prodromal Alzheimer's disease group and 0·95 (0·92-0·98) for the asymptomatic group versus the Alzheimer's disease dementia group. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 282 Evidence: low

APOE4 homozygosity represents a distinct genetic form of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Nature Medicine 2024-05

Analyzing postmortem brain pathology from over 3,200 people plus biomarker data from more than 10,000 more, researchers found that people who inherit two copies of the APOE4 gene variant (about 2-3% of the population) develop Alzheimer's brain changes almost universally and on a predictable timeline starting around age 55, much like known single-gene forms of Alzheimer's. The authors argue this makes APOE4 homozygosity itself a genetic form of Alzheimer's disease rather than just a risk factor. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort Evidence: high

CSF sAPPβ, YKL-40, and neurofilament light in frontotemporal lobar degeneration

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Neurology 2017-06-07

The combination of sAPPβ with YKL-40 and with NfL in CSF could be useful to increase the certainty of the diagnosis of FTLD-related syndromes in clinical practice. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 159 Evidence: moderate

TREM2 is an innate immune receptor expressed on the surface of microglia. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are useful in the diagnosis and the prediction of progression of several neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →

Participants: 535 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

Amyloid precursor protein metabolism and inflammation markers in preclinical Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neurology 2015-07-15

Our findings suggest that inflammation in the CNS increases in normal aging and is intimately related to markers of neurodegeneration in the preclinical stages of AD and SNAP. sAPPβ and β-secretase activity are not useful diagnostic or staging markers in preclinical AD. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

Our data suggest that interactions between biomarkers in AD result in a 2-phase phenomenon of pathological cortical thickening associated with low CSF Aβ, followed by atrophy once CSF p-tau becomes abnormal. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 145 Evidence: low

Plasma p-tau212 might have utility for theragnostics, monitoring therapy efficacy, and as a target engagement biomarker in clinical trials both in sporadic and DSAD. 1 key finding →

Participants: 245 Evidence: low

Almost all individuals with Down Syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer's disease (AD) by mid to late life. 3 key findings →

Participants: 229 Evidence: moderate

Autosomal-dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) is a genetic disorder caused by mutations in Amyloid Precursor Protein (APP) or Presenilin (PSEN) genes. 4 key findings →

Participants: 18 Evidence: low

Low cerebrospinal fluid concentration of mitochondrial DNA in preclinical Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2013-09-04

Using quantitative polymerase chain reaction techniques, we measured circulating cell-free mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from study participants, selected from a cohort of 282 subjects, who were classified according to their concentrations of amyloid β1-42, total tau, and phosphorylated tau and by the presence or absence of dementia, into asymptomatic subjects at risk of AD, symptomatic patients diagnosed with sporadic AD, presymptomatic subjects carrying pathogenic PSEN1 mutations, and patients diagnosed with frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 282 Evidence: moderate

Plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau)181, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), neurofilament light chain (NfL), and amyloid beta ratio (Aβ42/40) may have diagnostic and prognostic value in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,298 Evidence: moderate

Biomarkers in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) can track specific pathophysiological pathways underlying Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 44 Evidence: moderate

Mid-life obesity is an established risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, whereas late-life obesity has been proposed as a protective state. 4 key findings →

Participants: 162 Evidence: low

These results indicate that an increase in the baseline level of amyloid peptides, which are associated with an increase in p-tau (181), may be a biological characteristic and possibly a risk factor for AD. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

↑ 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