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

27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–11 of 11 studies with an author at Howard University (US) · 27,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 11 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.

Subjects

Authors

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

Other institutions

From OpenAlex; 13,259 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

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.

Variants in the ATP-binding cassette transporter (ABCA7), apolipoprotein E ϵ4,and the risk of late-onset Alzheimer disease in African Americans

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. JAMA 2013-04-01

Genome-wide significance in fully adjusted models (sex, age, APOE genotype, population stratification) was observed for a SNP in ABCA7 (rs115550680, allele = G; frequency, 0.09 cases and 0.06 controls; odds ratio [OR], 1.79 [95% CI, 1.47-2.12]; P = 2.2 × 10(-9)), which is in linkage disequilibrium with SNPs previously associated with Alzheimer disease in Europeans (0.8 Conclusions and relevance In this meta-analysis of data from African American participants, Alzheimer disease was significantly associated with variants in ABCA7 and with other genes that have been associated with Alzheimer disease in individuals of European ancestry. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Participants: 5,896 Evidence: high

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

Novel Alzheimer Disease Risk Loci and Pathways in African American Individuals Using the African Genome Resources Panel: A Meta-analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2021-01-01

In addition, several loci associated with rare variants, including a genome-wide significant intergenic locus near IGF1R at 15q26 (P = 1.7 × 10-9) and 6 additional loci with suggestive significance (P ≤ 5 × 10-7) such as API5 at 11p12 (P = 8.8 × 10-8) and RBFOX1 at 16p13 (P = 5.4 × 10-7) were identified. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,784 Evidence: high

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

A randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk information for Alzheimer disease via telephone

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100. Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 2017-07-20

PurposeTelephone disclosure of genetic test results can improve access to services. 4 key findings →

Participants: 257 Evidence: high

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

Incorporating ethnicity into genetic risk assessment for Alzheimer disease: the REVEAL study experience

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 2008-03-01

The Risk Evaluation and Education for Alzheimer Disease study provides an instructive example of a process to develop risk assessment protocols that are sensitive to the implications of genetic testing for multiple ethnic groups with differing levels of risk. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

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

Geospatial analysis of patients’ social determinants of health for health systems science and disparity research

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. International Anesthesiology Clinics 2022-12-08

The cross-disciplinary expertise, required for GA, common in the days before medical specialization and enabled by the relative paucity of development in various fields compared with today, can be reborn with the advent of Electronic Health Records (EHR) systems that make the tools of medical geography accessible to a wide variety of health care researchers and clinical subspecialties. 4 key findings →

Participants: 127 Evidence: low

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

Population Surveillance of Dementia Mortality

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2011-04-20

Geographic and temporal variation in occurrence of dementia within the US has received little attention despite its importance for generation of new etiologic hypotheses and health services research. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Fluorescent light-induced chromatid breaks distinguish Alzheimer disease cells from normal cells in tissue culture

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1996-05-01

The neurodegeneration and amyloid deposition of sporadic Alzheimer disease (AD) also occur in familial AD and in all trisomy-21 Down syndrome (DS) patients, suggesting a common pathogenetic mechanism. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

X-ray-induced chromatid damage in cells from Down syndrome and Alzheimer disease patients in relation to DNA repair and cancer proneness

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Cancer genetics and cytogenetics 1993-10-01

Frequencies of chromatid aberrations in response to G2-phase x-irradiation were compared in PHA-stimulated blood lymphocytes from healthy control subjects, Down syndrome (DS) patients, and Alzheimer disease (AD) patients. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

P3‐259: Geographic variation in mortality from dementia in the United States in 1999‐2006

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 25 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2011-07-01

Geographic variation in occurrence of dementia within the US has received little attention despite its importance for generation of new etiologic hypotheses and health services research. 1 key finding →

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
  • 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