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 Helpline800-272-390024 hours a day, 365 days a yearFree, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline98824/7Call 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) Helpline866-232-84849:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a weekLicensed 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 376–400 of 1,615 studies in Genetics(page 16 of 65)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Nature Aging·2026-05-15
The APOE locus is the strongest genetic factor for Alzheimer's disease, with ε4 increasing and ε2 decreasing risk, yet the basis of these opposing effects remains unclear. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Molecular psychiatry·2011-05-10
Apolipoprotein E (APOE) dependent lifetime risks (LTRs) for Alzheimer Disease (AD) are currently not accurately known and odds ratios alone are insufficient to assess these risks. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·1999-05-01
The combined measure of CSF Abeta42 and tau meets the requirements for clinical use in discriminating AD from normal aging and specific neurologic disorders. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Nature genetics·1998-08-01
Alpha-2-macroglobulin (alpha-2M; encoded by the gene A2M) is a serum pan-protease inhibitor that has been implicated in Alzheimer disease (AD) based on its ability to mediate the clearance and degradation of A beta, the major component of beta-amyloid deposits. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2001-03-01
Cerebrospinal fluid tau and CSF-Abeta42 have so far been studied in research settings, under conditions providing data on the optimal performance. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2009-07-08
PIB-positive subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are significantly more likely to convert to AD than PIB-negative patients, faster converters having higher PIB retention levels at baseline than slower converters. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2018-02-27
The amyloid β subgroups did not differ for any psychobehavioural, cognitive, actigraphy, and structural and functional neuroimaging results after adjustment for age, sex, and level of education More participants positive for amyloid β deposition had the APOE ε4 allele (33 [38%] vs 29 [13%], p 1-42 concentration in CSF significantly correlated with mean 18 F-florbetapir uptake at baseline (r=-0·62, p 1-42 to amyloid β 1-40 (r=-0·61, p 18 F-florbetapir uptake at baseline (mean standard uptake value ratio 1·46 [SD 0·16] vs 1·02 [SD 0·20]), and more were carriers of the APOE ε4 allele (three [75%] of four vs 33 [39%] of 83). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2010-07-01
This risk score could be used to identify persons at risk of LOAD, but can also be used to adjust for confounders in epidemiologic studies. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2015-07-15
Our findings suggest that inflammation in the CNS increases in normal aging and is intimately related to markers of neurodegeneration in the preclinical stages of AD and SNAP. sAPPβ and β-secretase activity are not useful diagnostic or staging markers in preclinical AD. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2014-07-01
Microbleed presence was associated with lower CSF Aβ42 in AD and vascular dementia (standardized beta = -0.09, P = .003; standardized beta = -0.30, P = .01), and higher CSF tau in controls (standardized beta = 0.10, P = .03). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2015-01-07
The proportion of progressors was 11% (8/41), 34% (14/41), 56% (19/34), and 71% (60/85) in A-N-, A+N-, SNAP, and A+N+, respectively; the proportion of APOE ε4 carriers was 29%, 70%, 31%, and 71%, respectively, with the SNAP group featuring a significantly different proportion than both A+N- and A+N+ groups (p ≤ 0.005). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·PLoS genetics·2010-09-23
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of late-onset Alzheimer disease (LOAD) have consistently observed strong evidence of association with polymorphisms in APOE. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Nature communications·2023-04-21
Genetic studies of Alzheimer disease (AD) have prioritized variants in genes related to the amyloid cascade, lipid metabolism, and neuroimmune modulation. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2004-12-01
Family history of dementia was associated with an increased risk of dementia and AD in this very old population, but only among APOE epsilon4 carriers. 5 key findings →
Individuals with rapid progression were more likely to have at least one APOE ε4 allele (OR: 2.08 [95% CI: 1.16–3.74], p < 0.01), higher Braak stage (2.19 [1.20–3.98], p < 0.01), higher Thal phase (2.45 [1.24–4.83], p < 0.01), more severe white matter rarefaction (1.68 [1.21–2.35], p < 0.01), and in the final 24 months of life, more frequent untreated/undertreated hyperlipidemia (1.74 [1.35–5.56], p < 0.01) and less frequent untreated/undertreated depression (0.40 [0.17–0.91], p < 0.05). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2010-10-01
In this analysis, two single nucleotide polymorphisms in a locus on chromosome 9p21.2 were associated with ALS: rs3849942 (p=2·22×10(-6); odds ratio [OR] 1·39, 95% CI 1·21-1·59) and rs2814707 (p=3·32×10(-6); 1·38, 1·20-1·58). 5 key findings →
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 tierup to 10 pts
Journal's citation recordup to 4 pts
Study designup to 12 pts
Strength of evidenceup to 5 pts
Peer-review validationup to 10 pts
How recentup to 5 pts
Sample sizeup to 4 pts
Effect reportedup to 3 pts
Studied in peopleup to 3 pts
Randomised / blindedup to 2 pts
Times citedup to 7 pts
Citations per yearup to 5 pts
Impact for its field and yearup to 6 pts
Cited by studies hereup to 6 pts
Still being citedup to 4 pts
Senior author's track recordup to 4 pts
Institution's track recordup to 3 pts
Multi-centre collaborationup to 3 pts
Indexed in PubMedup to 2 pts
Free to readup 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.