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

28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 126–150 of 612 studies in Brain tissue and pathology (page 6 of 25) · 28,180 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)

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; 13,658 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Brain tissue and pathology” covers

Brain tissue and pathology — What is found in the brain itself, usually after death: plaques, tangles and other changes, and how they match symptoms in life.

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.

Cerebrospinal fluid tau and amyloid-β1-42 in patients with dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2015-06-30

Progressive cognitive decline in combination with a cerebrospinal fluid biomarker pattern of low levels of amyloid-β1-42 and high levels of total tau and phosphorylated tau is typical of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Staging of brain pathology related to sporadic Parkinson’s disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neurobiology of Aging 2002-12-28

This study traces the course of pathology in incidental and symptomatic Parkinson cases and proposes a staging procedure based upon the readily recognizable topographical extent of the lesions. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The brain in AIDS: central nervous system HIV-1 infection and AIDS dementia complex

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Science (New York, N.Y.) 1988-02-01

Infection with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) is frequently complicated in its late stages by the AIDS dementia complex, a neurological syndrome characterized by abnormalities in cognition, motor performance, and behavior. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy and Alzheimer disease - one peptide, two pathways

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2019-12-11

The shared role of amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) and Alzheimer disease (AD) is arguably the clearest instance of crosstalk between neurodegenerative and cerebrovascular processes. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy in the elderly

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2011-12-01

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) results from deposition of β-amyloid in the media and adventitia of small arteries and capillaries of the leptomeninges and cerebral cortex and is a major cause of lobar intracerebral hemorrhage and cognitive impairment in the elderly. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Facets of language performance in early‐onset and late‐onset Alzheimer's disease dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-09-01

Based on data from their first NACC visit with AD, there was considerable heterogeneity in language performance across people with EOAD and LOAD. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,189 Evidence: low

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

Psychiatric symptoms of frontotemporal dementia and subcortical (co-)pathology burden: new insights

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2023-01-05

Elaborating on the results, we validated one finding using a quantitative assessment of TDP-43 pathology in the granular layer of the hippocampus in FTLD-TDP brain donors with (n = 15) and without (n = 15) hallucinations. 3 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Plasma Phospho-Tau Identifies Alzheimer's Co-Pathology in Patients with Lewy Body Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society 2020-12-07

Plasma phospho-tau217 correlated with plasma phospho-tau181, CSF phospho-tau217 (rs = 0.68, P < 0.001), and negatively with CSF β-amyloid42/40 (rs = -0.52, P = 0.001). 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 35 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

LATE-NC Stage 3: a diagnostic rubric to differentiate severe LATE-NC from FTLD-TDP

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2025-04-28

A diagnostic rubric is required to distinguish between limbic-predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy neuropathologic change (LATE-NC) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration with TDP-43 inclusions (FTLD-TDP). 3 key findings →

Participants: 514 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Evaluation of blood-based, extracellular vesicles as biomarkers for aging-related TDP-43 pathology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2022-12-15

TDP-43 was significantly elevated in plasma ADEVs derived from autopsy confirmed LATE-NC subjects, with or without comorbid AD pathology. 4 key findings →

Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% 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