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 1,251–1,275 of 1,615 studies in Genetics(page 51 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 39 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·1996-06-01
Apolipoprotein E (apoE) is a major risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD), which is the most common cause of progressive dementing illness. 3 key findings →
The distribution of apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotypes as a function of age and sex has been examined in a French population of 417 Alzheimer disease (AD) patients and 1,030 control subjects. 1 key finding →
Neurexins (NRXNs) are synaptic cell adhesion molecules having essential roles in the assembly and maturation of synapses into fully functional units. 1 key finding →
We observed that GSK-3β activity was significantly upregulated in ApoE4 mice, accompanied by disruption of the insulin signaling pathway. 5 key findings →
In analyses of APOE ε4 carriers, dosage, and genetic risk score, APOE ε4 was associated with lower odds of fluctuating cognition and parkinsonism and higher odds of visual hallucinations. 5 key findings →
Peruvian GWAS identified Amerindian ancestry specific exonic AD susceptibility variant p.H157Y. This variant has been previously reported as AD marker in Han Chinese populations with extreme effect size, but its rarity and contradictory findings in other groups suggest a potential ancestry‐specific effect. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·npj Digital Medicine·2026-08-03
Early and accurate prognosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) remains limited by current biomarkers, which are often invasive, require expensive equipment, or fail to predict individual trajectories of cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Clinical Epigenetics·2025-10-03
Employing the random-effects IVW approach, we found that, as indicated by GrimAge, EAA was associated with an increased risk of AD (Odds Ratio [OR] = 1.025, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.006-1.044, p = 0.009). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Medicine·2026-05-15
Using a 2-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) approach, we evaluated MR evidence for genetically proxied effects of 10 pre-specified gut bacterial classes on type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and Alzheimer disease (AD), and assessed MR evidence for a direct genetically proxied effect of T2DM on AD. 5 key findings →
There is significant evidence that microglia contribute to neuroinflammation and neurotoxicity in AD 1,2 , yet there is also evidence to the contrary. 5 key findings →
Investigations of apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene, the major genetic risk modifier for Alzheimer's disease (AD), have yielded significant insights into the pathogenic mechanism. 4 key findings →
The apolipoprotein E (apoE) gene has been implicated in various conditions, most notably Alzheimer's disease and coronary artery disease. 3 key findings →
The APOE gene alleles modify human aging and the response to the diet at many levels with diverse pleotropic effects from gut to brain. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Biomolecules·2020-01-14
Apolipoprotein E (ApoE) has become a primary focus of research after the discovery of its strong linkage to Alzheimer's disease (AD), where the ApoE4 variant is the highest genetic risk factor for this disease. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive degenerative neurological disorder affecting nearly one in nine elderly people in the United States. 2 key findings →
Age and apolipoprotein E (ApoE) are the mightiest risk factors for dementia and cardiovascular diseases, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·FEBS letters·2019-05-27
Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype determines Alzheimer's disease (AD) susceptibility, with the APOE ε4 allele being an established risk factor for late-onset AD. 5 key findings →
Population-attributable risk models estimate that up to one-third of Alzheimer's disease (AD) cases may be preventable through risk factor modification. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2020-02-07
The allele ε4 of the apolipoprotein E gene (APOE ε4) is the major genetic risk factor for non-dominantly inherited Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 1 key finding →
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.