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 1–25 of 60 studies by Barkhof F (page 1 of 3) · 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.

Subjects

Other 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.

Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities in 2 Phase 3 Studies Evaluating Aducanumab in Patients With Early Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 83 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2022-01-01

Of 3285 included participants, the mean (SD) age was 70.4 (7.45) years; 1706 participants (52%) were female, 2661 (81%) had mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer disease, and 1777 (54%) used symptomatic medications for Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,087 Evidence: high

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

Two Randomized Phase 3 Studies of Aducanumab in Early Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease 2022-01-01

Alzheimer's disease is a progressive, irreversible, and fatal disease for which accumulation of amyloid beta is thought to play a key role in pathogenesis. 4 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,638 Evidence: high

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

A phase III randomized trial of gantenerumab in prodromal Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2017-12-08

The study was stopped early for futility, but dose-dependent effects observed in exploratory analyses on select clinical and biomarker endpoints suggest that higher dosing with gantenerumab may be necessary to achieve clinical efficacy. 2 key findings →

Participants: 3,089 Evidence: high

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

Central Review of Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities in Two Phase III Clinical Trials of Bapineuzumab in Mild-To-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease Patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2017-01-01

ARIA was detected more often on MRI scans when every scan was reviewed by trained neuroradiologists and results adjudicated. 4 key findings →

Participants: 242 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Clinical Effect of Early vs Late Amyloid Positron Emission Tomography in Memory Clinic Patients: The AMYPAD-DPMS Randomized Clinical Trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 73 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2023-06-01

Baseline and 3-month visit data were available for 272 participants in arm 1 and 260 in arm 2 (median [IQR] age: 71 [65-77] and 71 [65-77] years; 150/272 male [55%] and 135/260 male [52%]; 122/272 female [45%] and 125/260 female [48%]; median [IQR] education: 12 [10-15] and 13 [10-16] years, respectively). 3 key findings →

Participants: 844 Evidence: high

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

Mechanism of amyloid removal in patients with Alzheimer disease treated with gantenerumab

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2011-10-10

Gantenerumab treatment resulted in a dose-dependent reduction in brain amyloid level, possibly through an effector cell-mediated mechanism of action. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

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

Cognitive reserve and clinical progression in Alzheimer disease: A paradoxical relationship

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Neurology 2019-07-02

Among Aβ-positive individuals, greater CR related to attenuated clinical progression in predementia stages of AD, but accelerated cognitive decline after the onset of dementia. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 175 Evidence: moderate

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

Challenging the cholinergic system in mild cognitive impairment: a pharmacological fMRI study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. NeuroImage 2004-12-01

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) often represents an early form of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 28 Evidence: high

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

Baseline predictors of rates of hippocampal atrophy in mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. Neurology 2007-10-01

Rates of hippocampal atrophy (%/year) were 0.0 +/- 0.8 in the absent, 1.7 +/- 0.4 in the moderate, and 3.6 +/- 1.0 in the severe (mean +/- SD) tertile. 2 key findings →

Participants: 323 Evidence: moderate

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

Two-step detection of Lewy body pathology via smell-function testing and CSF α-synuclein seed amplification

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Nature Communications 2025-08-05

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) α-synuclein (α-syn) seed amplification assays (SAAs) can detect Lewy body pathology (LBP) with high accuracy but are invasive and costly. 2 key findings →

Design: cohort Participants: 1,567 Evidence: early

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

Association Between Years of Education and Amyloid Burden in Patients With Subjective Cognitive Decline, MCI, and Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Neurology 2024-02-20

Across the cohort of 212 individuals with SCD+ (M(Age) = 69.17 years, F 42.45%), 258 individuals with MCI (M(Age) = 72.93, F 43.80%), and 195 individuals with dementia (M(Age) = 74.07, F 48.72%), no main effect of education (ß = 0.52, 95% CI -0.30 to 1.58), but a significant education-by-group interaction on CL values, was found ( p = 0.024) using linear regression modeling. 1 key finding →

Participants: 212 Evidence: high

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

Efficacy, safety and tolerability of rivastigmine capsules in patients with probable vascular dementia: the VantagE study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Current medical research and opinion 2008-07-31

Consistent with trials evaluating other cholinesterase inhibitors, rivastigmine did not provide consistent efficacy in probable VaD. 3 key findings →

Participants: 710 Evidence: high

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

Interpreting Biomarker Results in Individual Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment in the Alzheimer's Biomarkers in Daily Practice (ABIDE) Project

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2017-12-01

Three- and 1-year progression risks were 86% (95% CI, 71%-95%) and 27% (95% CI, 17%-41%) when MRI results were abnormal, 82% (95% CI, 73%-89%) and 26% (95% CI, 20%-33%) when CSF test results were abnormal, and 89% (95% CI, 79%-95%) and 26% (95% CI, 18%-36%) when the results of both tests were abnormal. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 525 Evidence: moderate

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

MRI visual rating scales in the diagnosis of dementia: evaluation in 184 post-mortem confirmed cases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2016-03-01

Additionally, the performance of each scale to predict dementia pathology both individually and in combination was evaluated using a support vector classifier, which was compared with expert scan assessment to estimate clinical value. 2 key findings →

Participants: 184 Evidence: low

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

Biomarker-based prognosis for people with mild cognitive impairment (ABIDE): a modelling study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. The Lancet. Neurology 2019-09-13

The models could aid clinicians in the interpretation of CSF biomarker and hippocampal volume results in individuals with MCI, and help research and clinical settings to prepare for a future of precision medicine in Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

Participants: 883 Evidence: moderate

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

Changes in white matter as determinant of global functional decline in older independent outpatients: three year follow-up of LADIS (leukoaraiosis and disability) study cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 2009-07-06

The three year results of the LADIS study suggest that in older adults who seek medical attention for non-disabling complaints, severe age related changes in white matter independently and strongly predict rapid global functional decline. 3 key findings →

Participants: 633 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Sex differences in CSF biomarkers vary by Alzheimer disease stage and APOE ε4 genotype

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Neurology 2020-08-11

Within APOE ε4 carriers, sex differences in CSF p-Tau are more evident in early disease stages, whereas for APOE ε4 noncarriers, sex differences are more evident in advanced disease stages. 3 key findings →

Participants: 1,801 Evidence: low

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

↑ 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