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 34 studies in Genetics in Nature Communications (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.

Other subjects

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.

What “Genetics” covers

Genetics — Inherited risk: APOE and the other risk genes, and what they do and don't tell you.

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.

Common variants in Alzheimer's disease and risk stratification by polygenic risk scores

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. Nature communications 2021-06-07

Genetic discoveries of Alzheimer's disease are the drivers of our understanding, and together with polygenetic risk stratification can contribute towards planning of feasible and efficient preventive and curative clinical trials. 2 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 409,435 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Cerebral small vessel disease genomics and its implications across the lifespan

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100. Nature communications 2020-12-08

White matter hyperintensities (WMH) are the most common brain-imaging feature of cerebral small vessel disease (SVD), hypertension being the main known risk factor. 1 key finding →

Evidence: moderate

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

Genetic influences on brain and cognitive health and their interactions with cardiovascular conditions and depression

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Nature communications 2024-06-18

Approximately 40% of dementia cases could be prevented or delayed by modifiable risk factors related to lifestyle and environment. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

The Human Microglia Atlas (HuMicA) unravels changes in disease-associated microglia subsets across neurodegenerative conditions

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Nature communications 2025-01-16

Dysregulated microglia activation, leading to neuroinflammation, is crucial in neurodegenerative disease development and progression. 1 key finding →

Participants: 90,716 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

A common 19 bp APOE enhancer deletion is protective against Alzheimer's disease in African Americans

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Nature Communications 2026-02-02

The APOE-ε4/ε4 genotype is the strongest genetic risk factor for sporadic Alzheimer's disease, though the relative risk is diminished in individuals with African ancestry. 2 key findings →

Design: case-control Evidence: moderate

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

Pharmacologically reversible zonation-dependent endothelial cell transcriptomic changes with neurodegenerative disease associations in the aged brain

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Nature communications 2020-09-04

The molecular signatures of cells in the brain have been revealed in unprecedented detail, yet the ageing-associated genome-wide expression changes that may contribute to neurovascular dysfunction in neurodegenerative diseases remain elusive. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Synergistic insights into human health from aptamer- and antibody-based proteomic profiling

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Nature Communications 2021-11-24

Affinity-based proteomics has enabled scalable quantification of thousands of protein targets in blood enhancing biomarker discovery, understanding of disease mechanisms, and genetic evaluation of drug targets in humans through protein quantitative trait loci (pQTLs). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Integration of Alzheimer's disease genetics and myeloid genomics identifies disease risk regulatory elements and genes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Nature communications 2021-03-12

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified more than 40 loci associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), but the causal variants, regulatory elements, genes and pathways remain largely unknown, impeding a mechanistic understanding of AD pathogenesis. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

CCNF mutations in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Nature communications 2016-04-15

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are overlapping, fatal neurodegenerative disorders in which the molecular and pathogenic basis remains poorly understood. 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

scGNN is a novel graph neural network framework for single-cell RNA-Seq analyses

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Nature communications 2021-03-25

Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-Seq) is widely used to reveal the heterogeneity and dynamics of tissues, organisms, and complex diseases, but its analyses still suffer from multiple grand challenges, including the sequencing sparsity and complex differential patterns in gene expression. 5 key findings →

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