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 3,026–3,050 of 3,166 studies of type cohort or longitudinal study (page 122 of 127) · 27,780 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)

This list as a page: Cohort or longitudinal study in the library →

Browse by subject, author or institution

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

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.

In the fully adjusted Cox model, baseline statin exposure was associated with a lower risk of incident AMI (HR, 0.805; 95% CI, 0.731-0.887). 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 174,014 Evidence: high

Adult Vaccination History and Plasma Biomarker Signatures in the Asymptomatic PREVENT-AD Cohort

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-08-27

BackgroundEpidemiological studies increasingly associate several adult vaccinations with lower risk of Alzheimers disease (AD) and dementia, but the biological mechanisms underlying these observations remain unclear. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 192 Evidence: moderate

BackgroundFluid biomarkers enable the demonstration of the biological effects of novel therapies in Alzheimers disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 65 Evidence: high

BACKGROUNDPeople with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at higher risk of cerebral small vessel disease and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), potentially contributing to cognitive decline and dementia. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 62 Evidence: moderate

Evaluating Clinical Foundation Models for Early Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia Prediction from Longitudinal EHRs

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-03

Early identification of Alzheimers disease and related dementias (ADRD) remains challenging despite its importance for timely intervention, management of modifiable risk factors, and care planning. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Causal roles of phenotypic age and metabolic health on dementia: a Mendelian randomisation and structure learning study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-03

BackgroundPhenotypic age acceleration (PhenoAgeAccel), derived from PhenoAge, and MetaboHealth are composite exposures of biological ageing and metabolic health associated with dementia-related outcomes. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 272 Evidence: moderate

Sex Differences in the Associations between Education, Neuropathology, and Cognition

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-08

In female participants, higher education was associated with lower Thal amyloid phase, diffuse plaques, neuritic plaques, and Braak stage ({beta} range, -0.097 to -0.071; qFDR<.026); none was significant among male participants. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 2,592 Evidence: moderate

Predicting Conversion from SCD to MCI: A Machine Learning Study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-08

BACKGROUNDSubjective cognitive decline (SCD) may precede mild cognitive impairment (MCI), but not all individuals with SCD progress to MCI. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,352 Evidence: moderate

Structural, Functional and Cognitive Validation of a Deep-Learning MCI-to-AD Conversion Model in OASIS-3

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-10

BackgroundDeep-learning models predict mild cognitive impairment (MCI)-to-Alzheimers disease (AD) conversion from structural MRI with high accuracy. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 40 Evidence: moderate

Vascular and neurodegenerative contributions to cognitive decline and multidomain progression in de novo Parkinsons disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-11

Greater baseline WMH burden was associated with differential longitudinal progression in converters across eleven clinical outcomes, including cognition, gait, and functional independence (all q<0.05). 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Multi-trait Polygenic Profiling and Survival Free of Dementia and Disability: Results from the Health and Retirement Study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-11

ObjectiveTo determine whether a multi-trait polygenic profile for dementia is associated with dementia- and disability-free survival in middle-aged and older adults. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Data-driven subtypes of Alzheimer's Disease: A multicohort study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-11

INTRODUCTIONIndividuals with Alzheimers disease (AD) exhibit substantial heterogeneity in the severity of vascular changes and neurodegeneration, making the identification of biologically meaningful subtypes across the AD spectrum critical for improving prognosis and tailoring interventions. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,396 Evidence: moderate

These findings show that model-based, adaptive assessments can support high-frequency, remote detection and scalable longitudinal monitoring of early memory decline, providing a new way to assess memory decline trajectories in healthy aging and dementia. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 24 Evidence: moderate

Clonal Haematopoiesis Tracks Alzheimer's-like Cortical Atrophy in Community-Dwelling Older Adults

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-12

BackgroundClonal haematopoiesis (CH), the age-related expansion of mutated blood stem cells, is detectable in around 10% of people in their seventies, rises steeply with age, and is associated with several diseases. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,091 Evidence: moderate

Late Life Learning, Cognition, and Aging: A Longitudinal study of middle and older-aged adults in Beirut, Lebanon (3LC study)

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-15

BackgroundLebanon is undergoing substantial demographic and social change, with older adults comprising approximately 10% of the population. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,871 Evidence: moderate

It remains unclear whether the combined conditions confer an excess risk of hypoglycaemia-related hospitalisation beyond the risks associated with either condition alone. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 329,566 Evidence: moderate

Feasibility of remote self-administered cognitive assessment in an Alzheimer's disease treatment clinic

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-16

IntroductionRemote cognitive assessments offer an accessible, scalable way to support clinical characterization and longitudinal monitoring of cognition. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 209 Evidence: moderate

ObjectiveTo externally replicate and extend prior findings across two structurally independent healthcare data sources, evaluating whether predominant use of antihypertensive medications that stimulate versus inhibit angiotensin II type 2 and type 4 receptor signaling is associated with risk of incident ADRD. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 1,596,034 Evidence: high

Proteomic markers linking anxiety phenotypes to Alzheimers disease risk: a multi-analyte proteomic analysis

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-17

ImportanceAnxiety phenotypes - rumination, global anxiety, and worry (RAW) - are increasingly associated with Alzheimers disease and related dementias (ADRD) risk, yet how anxiety phenotypes relate to coordinated, multi-system biology in the at-risk older adults is unknown. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

A longitudinal study of age-related traits and cognitive function: The Collaborative Amish Aging and Memory Project (CAAMP)

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-20

Structured AbstractO_ST_ABSINTRODUCTIONC_ST_ABSThe Collaborative Amish Aging and Memory Project (CAAMP) is an ongoing longitudinal study spanning multiple sites, focused on cognitive function and age-related traits in Midwestern Amish (Ohio and Indiana) communities. 5 key findings →

Design: prospective cohort Participants: 3,978 Evidence: moderate

Smartphone Passive Digital Phenotyping in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-21

IntroductionFrontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is a devastating disease that commonly results in early onset dementia, yet its rarity and heterogeneity limit large-scale research and clinical trials. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 567 Evidence: moderate

The United States CADASIL Consortium: Baseline Findings from a Natural History Study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-22

Compared with controls, adjusted odds of classification into a more impaired CDR category were higher in all tiers (OR 2.55-5.08, 95% CI 1.22-11.34). 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 343 Evidence: moderate

Adaptation and Validation of Brief Tablet-Based Cognitive Assessment Tool in Uganda

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-23

For TabCAT tests, there were no notable floor or ceiling effects, and test scores were associated with age and education as expected. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 563 Evidence: moderate

Study of Ancestry, Health, Environment, and Late-Life Neurodegeneration (SAHEL)

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-24

INTRODUCTIONDementia research in sub-Saharan Africa remains limited despite rapid population aging and substantial ancestral, environmental, and vascular diversity. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 102 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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