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 551–575 of 612 studies with an author at Johns Hopkins University (US) (page 23 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.

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.

A major hurdle in Alzheimer disease research is the failure of mouse models to capture complexities of the human brain that contributes to repeated clinical trial failure. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Our findings suggest that quantification of WM changes in DS could provide a promising and clinically relevant biomarker for AD clinical onset and progression. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Deprescribing for People with Dementia: A Roadmap

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Drugs & Aging 2025-08-26

People with dementia (PWD) are frequently exposed to polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use, in which the risks of medication use outweigh the benefits or the medication is not aligned with treatment goals. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Addressing disparities related to Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease related dementias (AD/ADRD) is a priority for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neuroimaging correlates of HIV-associated BBB compromise

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Journal of neuroimmunology 2004-12-01

The mechanisms underlying blood-brain barrier (BBB) compromise in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and the ways in which BBB compromise might impair neurocognitive function remain poorly understood. 2 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: low

This study did not demonstrate evidence of a significant change in the MFV in the middle cerebral arteries or evidence of a significant change in the PI between UPA and EPA groups. 3 key findings →

Participants: 12 Evidence: high

Chromosome 21-specific yeast artificial chromosomes (YACs) have been constructed by a method that performs all steps in agarose, allowing size selection by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and the use of nanogram to microgram quantities of DNA. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

We propose that sleep disruption is a lever arm that influences how cognition emerges in development and then declines in response to Alzheimer disease in people with Down syndrome. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT) is common in older persons with Down syndrome (DS). 1 key finding →

Participants: 55 Evidence: low

We found a significant increase in the likelihood of AWV uptake among telehealth adopters by 10.2 percentage points (p <0.001) than non-adopters of telehealth in traditional FFS Medicare plans. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

We found a significant increase in the likelihood of AWV uptake among telehealth adopters by 10.2 percentage points (p <0.001) than non-adopters of telehealth in traditional FFS Medicare plans. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Neuronal pentraxin 1: A synaptic-derived plasma biomarker in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Neurobiology of disease 2018-03-06

Synaptic neurodegeneration is thought to be an early event initiated by soluble β-amyloid (Aβ) aggregates that closely correlates with cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Comprehension of prosody in Huntington's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry 1990-07-01

Patients with Huntington's Disease (HD) who were without dementia were compared to unilateral stroke patients and controls as previously reported in 1983, to discover if they had a prosodic defect. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The amyloid precursor protein (APP) is thought to be processed aberrantly to yield the major constituent of the amyloid plaques observed in the brains of patients with Alzheimer disease and Down syndrome. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The modified questionnaire and interview instruments capture a range of impairment in DS adults, including subthreshold symptomatology, and the instruments provide complementary information relevant to the ascertainment of dementia in DS. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

There is an urgent need for objective markers of Alzheimer’s disease (AD)-related cognitive impairment in people with Down syndrome (DS) to improve diagnosis, monitor disease progression and assess response to disease-modifying therapies. 4 key findings →

Participants: 80 Evidence: moderate

Total tau (T-tau), tau phosphorylated at threonine 181, and β-amyloid 1-42 peptide (Aβ42) were immunoassayed in CSF samples obtained from patients with MCI enrolled in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Medicare Plan Switching Among Assisted Living Residents: The Role of Memory Care

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2025-12-01

These findings suggest that moving to an AL influences Medicare enrollment decisions; and, variation in switching exists between the type of AL (general vs memory care) and whether or not an individual has dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 63,395 Evidence: low

Medicare Plan Switching Among Assisted Living Residents: The Role of Memory Care

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2025-12-01

These findings suggest that moving to an AL influences Medicare enrollment decisions; and, variation in switching exists between the type of AL (general vs memory care) and whether or not an individual has dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 63,395 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 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