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 62 studies by van der Flier WM (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.

Global Prevalence of Young-Onset Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2021-09-01

A total of 95 unique studies were included in this systematic review, of which 74 with 2 760 379 unique patients were also included in 5-year age band meta-analyses. 5 key findings →

Design: systematic review Participants: 95 Evidence: high

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

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

The effect of physical activity on cognitive function in patients with dementia: A meta-analysis of randomized control trials

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100. Ageing research reviews 2015-11-28

Non-pharmacological therapies, such as physical activity interventions, are an appealing alternative or add-on to current pharmacological treatment of cognitive symptoms in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Participants: 802 Evidence: high

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

Duration of preclinical, prodromal, and dementia stages of Alzheimer's disease in relation to age, sex, and APOE genotype

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2019-06-01

Estimates of AD disease duration become more accurate if age, sex, setting, APOE, and cerebrospinal fluid tau are taken into account. 2 key findings →

Participants: 3,268 Evidence: low

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

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

Neurogranin as a Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarker for Synaptic Loss in Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2015-11-01

Baseline CSF levels of NGRN in patients with AD (median level, 2381 pg/mL [interquartile range, 1651-3416 pg/mL]) were higher than in cognitively normal participants (median level, 1712 pg/mL [interquartile range, 1206-2724 pg/mL]) (P = .04). 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 163 Evidence: moderate

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

Consensus classification of posterior cortical atrophy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2017-03-02

There was strong agreement regarding the definition of the core clinico-radiological syndrome, meaning that the current consensus statement should be regarded as a refinement, development, and extension of previous single-center PCA criteria rather than any wholesale alteration or redescription of the syndrome. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Age and diagnostic performance of Alzheimer disease CSF biomarkers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Neurology 2012-02-01

Core CSF changes in Alzheimer disease (AD) are decreased amyloid β(1-42), increased total tau, and increased phospho-tau, probably indicating amyloid plaque accumulation, axonal degeneration, and tangle pathology, respectively. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 529 Evidence: moderate

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

Optimizing patient care and research: the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2014-01-01

Since its opening in 2000, patient care and research go hand in hand at the Alzheimer center of the VU University Medical Center, both organized in such a way that they mutually strengthen each other. 1 key finding →

Participants: 4,000 Evidence: moderate

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

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

Cerebrospinal fluid VILIP-1 and YKL-40, candidate biomarkers to diagnose, predict and monitor Alzheimer's disease in a memory clinic cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2015-09-17

CSF levels of YKL-40 may have utility for discriminating between cognitively normal individuals and patients with MCI or AD. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Preclinical AD predicts decline in memory and executive functions in subjective complaints

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Neurology 2013-09-18

We assessed whether preclinical Alzheimer disease (AD) based on CSF biomarkers at baseline predicts decline in cognitive functioning as measured by repeated neuropsychological tests for 4 cognitive domains in patients with subjective complaints. 4 key findings →

Participants: 132 Evidence: moderate

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

↑ 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