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 651–675 of 815 studies in Getting a diagnosis (page 27 of 33) · 28,180 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)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “Getting a diagnosis” covers

Getting a diagnosis — How Alzheimer's is identified, how accurate the tests are, and how early it can be caught.

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.

Among people with dementia, predicted 1-year mortality was higher among those with hip fracture (35.4%) versus those without hip fracture (14.8%), with similar patterns for pneumonia (49.6% vs. 13.0%). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Across all participants, momentary effects of environmental distractions were minimal. 5 key findings →

Participants: 380 Evidence: low

With this study, we will contribute nationally representative data on health, dementia and cognitive aging in Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, as well as harmonized data in Cuba to expand understanding of aging and dementia in the Hispanic Caribbean and promote cross-national comparative research around the world. 1 key finding →

Participants: 1,500 Evidence: low

Among the 45 individuals with dementia, mixed dementia had the highest prevalence (42.4%), followed by AD-only (24.4%), non-AD other dementia (22.2%), and non-AD vascular dementia subtypes (11.1%). 5 key findings →

Participants: 45 Evidence: low

The ToAI framework followed a nine-step process: preparation, translation, native-speaker review, VIP team review, external panel review, pilot testing, proofreading, final formatting, and ongoing review and improvement. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

The results of gene set enrichment and gene set variation analyses indicated that immune-related pathways were upregulated in patients with VaD. 4 key findings →

Participants: 1,620 Evidence: low

Drug treatments in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Clinical medicine (London, England) 2016-06-01

Despite the significant public health issue that it poses, only five medical treatments have been approved for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and these act to control symptoms rather than alter the course of the disease. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

A dementing syndrome has been identified in a group of psychiatric cases aged 71-90 years, presenting initially with a subacute/acute confusional state, often fluctuating and associated with visual hallucinations and behavioural disturbances. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD) together contribute to almost 90 % of all dementia cases leading to major health challenges of our time with a substantial global socioeconomic burden. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

<0.001), with key domain correlations ≥0.7 (language, memory, executive). 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 639 Evidence: moderate

Alpha-synuclein seeding amplification assays in Lewy body dementia: a brief review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Molecular Neurodegeneration 2025-07-01

Lewy body dementia (LBD), which includes dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD), is characterized by cognitive decline, sleep disturbances, motor dysfunction, and other debilitating clinical symptoms. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

To balance high-quality measurement of cognitive domains and maintain the ability to perform meaningful cross-national comparisons, each HCAP should include a common set of at least three to four continuously distributed test items per domain that can link domains across studies. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Here we show, psychiatric behavioural symptoms and difficulties in activities of daily living, fluctuate alongside cognitive decline. 677 activities of daily living and 632 psychiatric behaviour questionnaires are available at intervals of 3 months. 5 key findings →

Participants: 141 Evidence: low

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Responders (R) and Non-Responders (NR) to lymphatic-venous anastomosis (LVA) surgery for relief of cognitive impairment show significant difference in their p-tau181/Aβ42 ratios via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) of their cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). 3 key findings →

Participants: 43 Evidence: moderate

We included 71 DLB (76.8 ± 7.4 years old, 25 females) and 71 age- and sex-matched AD patients (and 75.2 ± 5.3 years old, 27 females). 5 key findings →

Participants: 71 Evidence: low

We identified 51 transcriptome-wide significant (edgeR q < 0.05) DEGs, compared to controls, and 26 transcriptome-wide significant DEGs, compared to PD, in PDD plasma SEV. 5 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

Magnetic resonance imaging based dementia severity assessment facilitates timely diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) progression. 1 key finding →

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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% 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