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 1–17 of 17 studies by de Leon MJ · 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.

Hippocampal formation glucose metabolism and volume losses in MCI and AD

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2001-07-01

We used MRI volume sampling with coregistered and atrophy corrected FDG-PET scans to test three hypotheses: 1) hippocampal formation measures are superior to temporal neocortical measures in the discrimination of normal (NL) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI); 2) neocortical measures are most useful in the separation of Alzheimer disease (AD) from NL or MCI; 3) measures of PET glucose metabolism (MRglu) have greater diagnostic sensitivity than MRI volume. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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

Prediction of cognitive decline in normal elderly subjects with 2-[(18)F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose/poitron-emission tomography (FDG/PET)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2001-08-28

Neuropathology studies show that patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease typically have lesions of the entorhinal cortex (EC), hippocampus (Hip), and temporal neocortex. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 12 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Posterior cingulate glucose metabolism, hippocampal glucose metabolism, and hippocampal volume in cognitively normal, late-middle-aged persons at 3 levels of genetic risk for Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2013-03-01

Although there were no significant differences among the 3 groups of participants in their clinical ratings, neuropsychological test scores, hippocampal volumes (P = .60), or hippocampal glucose metabolism measurements (P = .12), there were significant group differences in their posterior cingulate glucose metabolism measurements (P = .001). 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 31 Evidence: low

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

Longitudinal CSF and MRI biomarkers improve the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2005-08-26

The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is limited because it is based on non-specific behavioral and neuroimaging findings. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Clinical utility of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in the diagnosis of early Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2014-05-03

Several potential disease-modifying drugs for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have failed to show any effect on disease progression in clinical trials, conceivably because the AD subjects are already too advanced to derive clinical benefit from treatment and because diagnosis based on clinical criteria alone introduces a high misdiagnosis rate. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

The Global Deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. The American journal of psychiatry 1982-09-01

Cognitive decline associated with old age and consistent with the diagnosis of primary degenerative dementia is a unique clinical syndrome with characteristic phenomena and progression. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

MRI and CSF studies in the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Journal of internal medicine 2004-09-01

In cross-section and longitudinally, our results show that evaluations of the P-tau231 level are highly correlated with reductions in the MRI hippocampal volume and by using CSF and MRI measures together one improves the separation of NL and MCI. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

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

Vascular fibrosis and calcification in the hippocampus in aging, Alzheimer disease, and Down syndrome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2001-11-28

Study of the hippocampal formation of 82 subjects, including 25 control subjects from 33 to 83 years of age, 34 subjects with Alzheimer disease (AD) from 65 to 89 years of age, and 23 subjects with Down syndrome (DS) from 33 to 72 years of age, revealed hippocampal vasculopathy with fibrosis and calcification (VFC) in 40% of control, 59% of AD, and 4% of DS subjects. 5 key findings →

Participants: 82 Evidence: moderate

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

Hippocampal volumes in cognitively normal persons at genetic risk for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Annals of neurology 1998-08-01

Brain imaging techniques have the potential to characterize neurobiological changes that precede the onset of cognitive impairment in persons at risk for Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →

Participants: 22 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

The histological validation of post mortem magnetic resonance imaging-determined hippocampal volume in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Neuroscience 2000-01-01

For 11 AD cases and four normal elderly controls, post mortem volumes of the hippocampal subdivisions were calculated by using magnetic resonance imaging and histological sections. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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