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

30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–25 of 108 studies in Genetics published 2023 (page 1 of 5) · 30,580 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 108 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.

Other subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,054 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.

APOE Genotype and Alzheimer Disease Risk Across Age, Sex, and Population Ancestry

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100. JAMA Neurology 2023-12-01

Among 68 756 unique individuals, analyses included 21 852 East Asian (demographic data not available), 5738 Hispanic (68.2% female; mean [SD] age, 75.4 [8.8] years), 7145 non-Hispanic Black (hereafter referred to as Black) (70.8% female; mean [SD] age, 78.4 [8.2] years), and 34 021 non-Hispanic White (hereafter referred to as White) (59.3% female; mean [SD] age, 77.0 [9.1] years) individuals. 5 key findings →

Design: case-control Participants: 68,756 Evidence: high

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

A randomized placebo-controlled trial of nicotinamide riboside in older adults with mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100. GeroScience 2023-11-23

Nicotinamide riboside (NR) increases blood levels of NAD+, a cofactor central to energy metabolism, and improves brain function in some rodent models of neurodegeneration. 2 key findings →

Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Association of African Ancestry-Specific APOE Missense Variant R145C With Risk of Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 73 out of 100. JAMA 2023-02-21

In this exploratory analysis, the APOE ε3[R145C] missense variant was associated with an increased risk of AD among individuals of African ancestry with the ε3/ε4 genotype. 5 key findings →

Design: case-control Participants: 31,929 Evidence: moderate

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

Multi-ancestry meta-analysis and fine-mapping in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 73 out of 100. Molecular psychiatry 2023-05-18

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of Alzheimer's disease are predominantly carried out in European ancestry individuals despite the known variation in genetic architecture and disease prevalence across global populations. 1 key finding →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Tau-targeting antisense oligonucleotide MAPTRx in mild Alzheimer's disease: a phase 1b, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Nature Medicine 2023-04-24

Tau plays a key role in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology, and accumulating evidence suggests that lowering tau may reduce this pathology. 1 key finding →

Design: phase-1-trial Participants: 46 Evidence: early

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

Genetic correlations between Alzheimer's disease and gut microbiome genera

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Scientific reports 2023-03-31

A growing body of evidence suggests that dysbiosis of the human gut microbiota is associated with neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's disease (AD) via neuroinflammatory processes across the microbiota-gut-brain axis. 5 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Harmonization of CSF and imaging biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease: Need and practical applications for genetics studies and preclinical classification

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100. Neurobiology of disease 2023-12-09

In Alzheimer's disease (AD) research, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Amyloid beta (Aβ), Tau and pTau are the most accepted and well validated biomarkers. 3 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Validation of newly derived polygenic risk scores for dementia in a prospective study of older individuals

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100. Alzheimer's & Dementia 2023-05-12

New PRSs for dementia significantly improve risk-prediction performance, but still account for less risk than APOE genotype overall. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort Participants: 12,031 Evidence: moderate

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

Genomics of perivascular space burden unravels early mechanisms of cerebral small vessel disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100. Nature medicine 2023-04-17

Perivascular space (PVS) burden is an emerging, poorly understood, magnetic resonance imaging marker of cerebral small vessel disease, a leading cause of stroke and dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 1,748 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Revealing Individual Neuroanatomical Heterogeneity in Alzheimer Disease Using Neuroanatomical Normative Modeling

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Neurology 2023-05-01

Regions with Z -scores Results Patients with AD (n = 206) had a median of 12 outlier regions (out of a possible 148), with the highest proportion of outliers (47%) in the parahippocampal gyrus. 2 key findings →

Participants: 33,072 Evidence: low

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

Brain expression quantitative trait locus and network analyses reveal downstream effects and putative drivers for brain-related diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Nature Genetics 2023-02-23

Gaining insight into the downstream consequences of non-coding variants is an essential step towards the identification of therapeutic targets from genome-wide association study (GWAS) findings. 4 key findings →

Participants: 31,684 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Explainable variational autoencoder (E-VAE) model using genome-wide SNPs to predict dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Journal of biomedical informatics 2023-11-04

We obtained a predictive accuracy of 0.71 (95 % CI [0.59, 0.84]) with an AUC of 0.69 in the HRS test dataset and got an accuracy of 0.62 (95 % CI [0.56, 0.68]) with an AUC of 0.63 in the ROSMAP dataset. 3 key findings →

Participants: 234 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Multi-omic integration via similarity network fusion to detect molecular subtypes of ageing

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Brain communications 2023-04-04

Fusion of all five data modalities (n = 111) yielded two subtypes (n S1 = 53, n S2 = 58), which were nominally associated with diffuse amyloid plaques; however, this effect was not significant after correction for multiple testing. 5 key findings →

Participants: 111 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Cell-type-specific co-expression inference from single cell RNA-sequencing data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Nature communications 2023-08-10

The advancement of single cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) technology has enabled the direct inference of co-expressions in specific cell types, facilitating our understanding of cell-type-specific biological functions. 1 key finding →

Participants: 19 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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.

1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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    Where this research is being discussed: events