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
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 551–575 of 1,528 studies in Genetics marked Peer-reviewed(page 23 of 62)· 28,580 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)
From OpenAlex; 14,058 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.
Olfactory identification deficit is a useful screening tool for AD-related amnestic disorder, with sensitivity and specificity comparable to other established biomarkers, with benefits such as ease of administration and low cost. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Neurology·2014-05-02
Hypometabolism in PiB-positive, cognitively normal subjects in a population-based cohort occurs in AD-signature cortical regions and to a lesser extent in other cortical regions. 4 key findings →
The major known genetic risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD), apolipoprotein E-4 (APOE-4), is associated with lowered parietal, temporal, and posterior cingulate cerebral glucose metabolism in patients with a clinical diagnosis of AD. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Nature medicine·2019-11-04
We identified a PSEN1 (presenilin 1) mutation carrier from the world's largest autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease kindred, who did not develop mild cognitive impairment until her seventies, three decades after the expected age of clinical onset. 1 key finding →
By multiple logistic regression, the APOE-epsilon 4 allele frequency was significantly higher in the patients positive for HSV1 in brain than in the HSV1-negative AD group, the HSV1-positive non-AD group, or the HSV1-negative non-AD group (52.8% vs 10.0%, 3.6%, and 6.3%, respectively). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Nature·2020-02-12
Corticobasal degeneration (CBD) is a neurodegenerative tauopathy-a class of disorders in which the tau protein forms insoluble inclusions in the brain-that is characterized by motor and cognitive disturbances 1-3 . 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Molecular psychiatry·2016-01-26
Causes of the well-documented association between low levels of cognitive functioning and many adverse neuropsychiatric outcomes, poorer physical health and earlier death remain unknown. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Nature neuroscience·2014-08-17
We used a collection of 708 prospectively collected autopsied brains to assess the methylation state of the brain's DNA in relation to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·PloS one·2007-09-19
The role of DNA cytosine methylation, an epigenetic regulator of chromatin structure and function, during normal and pathological brain development and aging remains unclear. 1 key finding →
We investigated associations between apolipoprotein E (APOE) alleles and motor manifestations in Alzheimer's dementia (AD) capitalizing on National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center data: the baseline evaluations of older adults (≥60 years) with a diagnosis of AD were analyzed. 3 key findings →
A total of 37 SuperAgers (73% female, mean [standard deviation] 82.7 [2.8] years old) and 35 controls (54% female, 83.7 [4.3] years old) were included. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·PloS one·2022-07-13
Hippocampal subfield atrophy is a prime structural change in the brain, associated with cognitive aging and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Clinical genetic diagnosis was achieved in 7 of 50 (14%) of the patients, with a further 8 patients (16%) found to have established risk factors which may have contributed to their EOD. 5 key findings →
We performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of human extreme longevity (EL), defined as surviving past the 99th survival percentile, by aggregating data from four centenarian studies. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2017-05-15
The pathogenic relevance in Alzheimer's disease (AD) presents a decrease of cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-ß42 (Aß42) burden and an increase in cerebrospinal fluid total tau (T-tau) levels. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·BMC genomics·2022-01-28
Using the data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), we performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) between 565,373 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and 16 key AD biomarkers from 1,576 subjects at four visits. 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%),
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 (3.6% 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.