alzhub.org
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.

Research

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 176–200 of 1,459 studies in Brain scans and imaging (page 8 of 59) · 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.

Other subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Brain scans and imaging” covers

Brain scans and imaging — MRI, PET and other scans: what they show, how early, and how reliably.

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.

Comparing positron emission tomography imaging and cerebrospinal fluid measurements of β-amyloid

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2013-12-01

CSF and amyloid PET measurements of Aβ were consistent in the majority of subjects in the cross-sectional and longitudinal populations. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 374 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

One-year brain atrophy evident in healthy aging

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience 2009-12-01

An accurate description of changes in the brain in healthy aging is needed to understand the basis of age-related changes in cognitive function. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 122 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Association of Preclinical Alzheimer Disease With Optical Coherence Tomographic Angiography Findings

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. JAMA ophthalmology 2018-11-01

Fifty-eight eyes from 30 participants (53% female; mean [SD] age, 74.5 [5.6] years; age range, 62-92 years) were included in the analysis. 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 32 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Prodromal autonomic symptoms and signs in Parkinson's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society 2013-03-28

Pathologic staging systems suggest that autonomic dysfunction may be an early manifestation of Parkinson's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies. 2 key findings →

Design: prospective cohort Participants: 91 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Longitudinal validity of PET-based staging of regional amyloid deposition

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Human brain mapping 2020-07-10

Positron emission tomography (PET)-based staging of regional amyloid deposition has recently emerged as a promising tool for sensitive detection and stratification of pathology progression in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 403 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Differential default mode network trajectories in asymptomatic individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2019-05-18

Widespread DMN FC changes were shown in frontal and posterior areas, as well as in the right hippocampus. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Characterization of Retinal Microvascular and Choroidal Structural Changes in Parkinson Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. JAMA ophthalmology 2021-02-01

A total of 124 eyes of 69 participants with PD (39 men [56.5%]; mean [SD] age, 71.7 [7.0] years) and 248 eyes of 137 control participants (77 men [56.2%]; mean [SD] age, 70.9 [6.7] years) were analyzed. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 69 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

19F and 1H MRI detection of amyloid beta plaques in vivo

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Nature neuroscience 2005-03-13

Formation of senile plaques composed of amyloid beta peptide, a pathological hallmark of Alzheimer disease, in human brains precedes disease onset by many years. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Magnetic Resonance Images Implicate That Glymphatic Alterations Mediate Cognitive Dysfunction in Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2022-10-26

ALPS-index may provide useful disease progression or treatment biomarkers for patients with AD as an indicator of modulation of glymphatic activity. 1 key finding →

Participants: 50 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ 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