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

31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 126–150 of 152 studies in Risk factors published 2021 (page 6 of 7) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 152 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; 16,851 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Risk factors” covers

Risk factors — Conditions, exposures and habits linked to a higher or lower chance of dementia, and how strong each link is.

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.

NLRP3 inflammasome activation and cell death

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Cellular & molecular immunology 2021-07-28

The NLRP3 inflammasome is a cytosolic multiprotein complex composed of the innate immune receptor protein NLRP3, adapter protein ASC, and inflammatory protease caspase-1 that responds to microbial infection, endogenous danger signals, and environmental stimuli. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

PM2.5 exposure in association with AD-related neuropathology and cognitive outcomes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Environmental pollution (Barking, Essex : 1987) 2021-10-08

Particulate matter with a diameter of less than 2.5 μm or PM2.5 is recognized worldwide as a cause of public health problems, mainly associated with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Biodegradable polymers and their nano-composites for the removal of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) from wastewater: A review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Environmental research 2021-07-15

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) target the endocrine system by interfering with the natural hormones in the body leading to adverse effects on human and animal health. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Fluorescent Determination of Butyrylcholinesterase Activity and Its Application in Biological Imaging and Pesticide Residue Detection

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. ACS Sensors 2021-01-27

Butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) is an essential human cholinesterase relevant to liver conditions and neurodegenerative diseases, which makes it a pivotal biomarker of health. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Geographic proximity, neuropathology and ADRC brain donation

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

Reducing Alzheimer disparities and generating the evidence needed to promote brain health for everyone requires diverse research representation, including areas near an ADRC. 3 key findings →

Participants: 428 Evidence: low

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

Exploring hospital-based health information technology functions for patients with Alzheimer’s Disease and related Dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Preventive Medicine Reports 2021-06-23

This study investigated whether hospital-adopted health information technology (HIT) is associated with a reduction in the frequency of preventable emergency department (ED) visits for patients with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Do ecological factors influence the clinical presentation of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry 2021-02-09

Since its first description by Charcot, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) has been classified as a single neurodegenerative disease involving motor neurons. 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Spatiotemporal trends in dementia‐associated deaths, what do the data reveal?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

There are factors, other than the step changes in underlying cause of death coding, driving the progressively increasing temporal trend in relative risk of dementia‐associated death. 2 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

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

Cross‐sectional association between the area deprivation index (ADI) and cognitive impairment in community‐dwelling older veterans

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 35 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

Participants were 1060 Veterans (response rate of 20.14%), mean age of 68.39 (SD=8.52) years, 59.0% Caucasian, 69.2% non‐Hispanic, 95.8% male, 12.0% screened positive for MCI and 15.6% for dementia. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Factors influencing medication adherence among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (ADRD)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 33 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

Adherence to ADRD medications was not associated with specialist availability but was related to individual and socioeconomic context factors in community‐dwelling older individuals with ADRD. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

↑ 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
  • Randomized / 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
  • Multicenter 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.

1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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    Where this research is being discussed: events