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
29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 2,051–2,075 of 2,235 studies in Genetics(page 83 of 90)· 29,780 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; 15,255 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 36 out of 100.·Proteomics·2004-01-01
One of the major difficulties in mining low abundance biomarkers from serum or plasma is due to the fact that a small number of proteins such as albumin, alpha2-macroglobulin, transferrin, and immunoglobulins, may represent as much as 80% of the total serum protein. 5 key findings →
The hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology is an accumulation of amyloid β (Aβ) and phosphorylated tau, which are encoded by the amyloid precursor protein (APP) and microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) genes, respectively. 4 key findings →
Active caspase-6 (Csp6) and Tau cleaved by Csp6 (TauDeltaCsp6) are abundant in neuritic plaques (NPs), neuropil threads (NPTs), and neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in end-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) (Guo H, Albrecht S, Bourdeau M, Petzke T, Bergeron C, LeBlanc AC: Active caspase-6 and caspase-6 cleaved Tau in neuropil threads, neuritic plaques and neurofibrillary tangles of Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Blood-based biomarkers present a considerable challenge: technically, as blood is a complex tissue and conceptually, as blood lacks direct contact with brain. 2 key findings →
Proteomics involves the identification of unknown proteins following their separation, often using two-dimensional electrophoresis, digestion of particular proteins of interest by trypsin, determination of the molecular weight of the resulting peptides, and database searching to make the identification of the proteins. 4 key findings →
These findings provide compelling evidence that sequence coding extends beyond the domain of spatial trajectories and is thus a fundamental function of the hippocampus. 2 key findings →
The last 30 years have seen a major advance in the understanding of the clinical and pathological heterogeneity of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and its overlap with frontotemporal dementia. 5 key findings →
Tauopathies with parkinsonism represent a spectrum of disease entities unified by the pathologic accumulation of hyperphosphorylated tau protein fragments within the central nervous system. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Journal of proteomics·2014-01-25
Alzheimer's disease is closely related to abnormal metabolism of phospholipids from neural membranes, so that the study of their dyshomeostasis could be of great interest for the discovery of potential biomarkers for diagnosis and disease monitoring. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Biochemistry·2006-07-01
Increased abundance of nitrotyrosine modifications of proteins have been documented in multiple pathologies in a variety of tissue types and play a role in the redox regulation of normal metabolism. 1 key finding →
The most common monogenic cause of small-vessel disease leading to ischemic stroke and vascular dementia is the neurodegenerative syndrome cerebral autosomal-dominant arteriopathy with subcortical infarcts and leukoencephalopathy (CADASIL), which is associated with mutations in the Notch 3 receptor. 4 key findings →
Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-associated dementia is a neuroinflammatory brain disorder that is fueled by viral infection and immune activation of brain mononuclear phagocytes (MP; macrophages and microglia). 5 key findings →
Variants at the gene encoding for the 5-hydrosytryptamine (serotonin) receptor 2A (HTR2A) have been associated with many psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia, mood disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, suicide, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, eating disorders, and Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
The tau protein is central to the etiology of several neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's disease, a subset of frontotemporal dementias, progressive supranuclear palsy and dementia following traumatic brain injury, yet the proteins it interacts with have not been studied using a systematic discovery approach. 2 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 29,780 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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%),
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 (3.5% 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.