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 351–375 of 546 studies in Vascular contributions (page 15 of 22) · 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 “Vascular contributions” covers

Vascular contributions — How blood vessel health, small-vessel disease and stroke risk contribute to dementia and cognitive decline.

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.

Serum C-reactive protein is linked to cerebral microstructural integrity and cognitive function

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Neurology 2010-03-01

These data suggest that low-grade inflammation as assessed by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein is associated with cerebral microstructural disintegration that predominantly affects frontal pathways and corresponding executive function. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Delusional misidentification and hallucinations in the early stages of dementia may improve differentiation between patients with dementia with Lewy bodies and those with Alzheimer's disease and have important treatment implications. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (INPH) is a syndrome of ventriculomegaly, gait impairment, cognitive decline and incontinence that occurs in an elderly population prone to many types of comorbidities. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Blood pressure is not a static parameter, but rather undergoes continuous fluctuations over time, as a result of the interaction between environmental and behavioural factors on one side and intrinsic cardiovascular regulatory mechanisms on the other side. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

A white matter disorder in dementia of the Alzheimer type: a pathoanatomical study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Annals of neurology 1986-03-01

In cases of Alzheimer's presenile and senile dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) and senile dementia of the Alzheimer type (SDAT), respectively, we have observed, in addition to the gray matter degeneration, a lesion that has the character of an incomplete infarction confined to the white matter. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The Blood-brain barrier (BBB), present at the level of the endothelium of cerebral blood vessels, selectively restricts the blood-to-brain paracellular diffusion of compounds; it is mandatory for cerebral homeostasis and proper neuronal function. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Intranasal delivery provides a practical, non-invasive method of bypassing the blood-brain barrier (BBB) to deliver therapeutic agents to the brain and spinal cord. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Because regional blood flow increases in association with the increased metabolic demand generated by localized increases in neural activity, functional imaging researchers often assume that changes in blood flow are an accurate read-out of changes in underlying neural activity. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Recent epidemiological studies suggest that diabetes mellitus is a strong risk factor for Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

A synthetic peptide (Asp-Ala-Glu-Phe-Arg-His-Asp-Ser-Gly-Tyr), homologous to the amino terminus of a protein purified from cerebrovascular amyloid (beta protein), induced antibodies in BALB/c mice that were used immunohistochemically to stain not only amyloid-laden cerebral vessels but neuritic plaques as well. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Transgenic mice that overexpress mutant human amyloid precursor protein (APP) exhibit one hallmark of Alzheimer's disease pathology, namely the extracellular deposition of amyloid plaques. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD), a major contributor to stroke, cognitive decline, and vascular dementia, accounts for around 25% of ischemic strokes and significantly impacts age-related neurological disability. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

• APOE4 carriers exhibit cerebrovascular dysfunction. • Endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) represent cell populations involved in facilitating vascular repair. • In APOE4 carriers, EPC colony count is associated with cerebral small vessel disease. • EPC colony count may indicate activation of mechanisms which protect cerebrovascular function in APOE4 carriers prior to the development of cognitive decline. 4 key findings →

Participants: 109 Evidence: low

↑ 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