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.

Find studies

Showing 1–25 of 847 studies in Genetics scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 1 of 34) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

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.

Alzheimer disease and cerebrovascular pathology: an update

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) 2002-05-01

Recent epidemiological and clinico-pathologic data suggest overlaps between Alzheimer disease (AD) and cerebrovascular lesions that may magnify the effect of mild AD pathology and promote progression of cognitive decline or even may precede neuronal damage and dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The apolipoprotein E (apoE) type 4 allele (APOE4) is a susceptibility gene for late-onset familial and sporadic Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) allele is associated with an early age of onset of the nonfamilial form of Alzheimer disease (AD) and with increased beta protein amyloid deposition in the brain. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Analysis of European mitochondrial haplogroups with Alzheimer disease risk

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Neuroscience letters 2004-07-01

We examined the association of mtDNA variation with Alzheimer disease (AD) risk in Caucasians (989 cases and 328 controls) testing the effect of individual haplogroups and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

We scanned throughout chromosome 21 to assess genetic associations with late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD) using 374 Japanese patients and 375 population-based controls, because trisomy 21 is known to be associated with early deposition of beta-amyloid (Abeta) in the brain. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Despite the success of large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWASs) on complex traits, our understanding of their genetic architecture is far from complete. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Only Apolipoprotein E polymorphisms have been consistently associated with the risk of late-onset Alzheimer disease (LOAD), but they represent only a minority of the underlying genetic effect. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Accumulation of the amyloid β (Aβ) peptide within the brain is hypothesized to be one of the main causes underlying the pathogenic events that occur in Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is pathologically characterized by α-synuclein aggregates in the brain. 1 key finding →

Participants: 22 Evidence: low

Altered brain white matter integrity in healthy carriers of the APOE epsilon4 allele: a risk for AD?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Neurology 2006-04-01

Although the mechanism underlying vulnerability of white matter tracts in APOE epsilon4 carriers is still unknown, these findings suggest that increased genetic risk for developing Alzheimer disease is associated with changes in microscopic white matter integrity well before the onset of dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The APOE-ε4 allele correlates with increased risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) and increased parenchymal amyloid plaques. 3 key findings →

Participants: 22 Evidence: low

In the initial kindred of ten affected Italian individuals (mean age of disease onset 59·8 years [SD 8·7]), we detected significant linkage of Parkinson's disease to chromosome 14 and nominated LRP10 as the disease-causing gene. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Severe CAA confers a greater risk of VLs in AD, even within strata of APOE genotype. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

APOE ε4 worsens hippocampal CA1 apical neuropil atrophy and episodic memory

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Neurology 2014-01-22

The APOE ε4 allele segregated dose-dependently and selectively with CA1-SRLM thinning and worse episodic memory performance in a pool of older subjects across a cognitive spectrum. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID) are a common cause of cognitive decline, yet limited therapies exist. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Among 104 537 individuals, the absolute 10-year risk of Alzheimer disease in 3017 women and men who were carriers of the APOE ɛ44 genotype was, respectively, 7% and 6% at age 60-69 years, 16% and 12% at age 70-79 years, and 24% and 19% at age 80 years and older. 1 key finding →

Participants: 537 Evidence: low

In the HELIAD sample, among 618 cognitively healthy participants (mean age 73.37 years, 58.4% female), followed for 2.92 ± 0.80 years, 73 developed AD/aMCI. 5 key findings →

Participants: 142,637 Evidence: low

We included 1179 CU subjects (n = 474 females (40%), 70.9 ± 4.5 years old) of European descent who had pTau217 and PACC. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 474 Evidence: moderate

↑ 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 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed