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

28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 76–100 of 103 studies with an author at Baylor College of Medicine (US) (page 4 of 5) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 103 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; 13,658 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.

Genome-wide association studies in Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2008-03-01

The genetics of Alzheimer disease (AD) to date support an age-dependent dichotomous model whereby earlier age of disease onset ( or = 65 years) representing most cases of AD has yet to be explained by a purely genetic model. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Detection of biomarkers with a multiplex quantitative proteomic platform in cerebrospinal fluid of patients with neurodegenerative disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2006-08-01

Biomarkers are needed to assist in the diagnosis and medical management of various neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD), and dementia with Lewy body (DLB). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Whole exome sequencing study identifies novel rare and common Alzheimer's-Associated variants involved in immune response and transcriptional regulation

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Molecular psychiatry 2018-08-14

The Alzheimer's Disease Sequencing Project (ADSP) undertook whole exome sequencing in 5,740 late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD) cases and 5,096 cognitively normal controls primarily of European ancestry (EA), among whom 218 cases and 177 controls were Caribbean Hispanic (CH). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

MELAS syndrome: Clinical manifestations, pathogenesis, and treatment options

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Molecular genetics and metabolism 2015-06-15

Mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke-like episodes (MELAS) syndrome is one of the most frequent maternally inherited mitochondrial disorders. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Parkinsonism, movement disorders and genetics in frontotemporal dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2016-02-19

Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) refers to a group of clinically and genetically heterogeneous neurodegenerative disorders that are a common cause of adult-onset behavioural and cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Use of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors, Angiotensin Receptor Blockers, and Risk of Dementia in Heart Failure

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. American Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias® 2015-12-24

Using the time-dependent Cox model, the adjusted dementia rate ratios (95% confidence-interval) among current and former users were 0.90(0.70-1.16) and 0.89 (0.71-1.10), respectively. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Social Disparities, Delirium Occurrence, and Related Outcomes Among Hospitalized Older Adults

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2025-09-30

A total of 260,200 older adults were screened for delirium (median [IQR] age in years: 78.0 [74.0-84.0]; female: 143,402 [55.1%]; non-Hispanic Black: 40,737 [15.8%]; Hispanic: 30,760 [11.9%]; median [IQR] Area Deprivation Index: 4.0 [2.0-6.0]; median [IQR] Charlson Comorbidity Index: 10.0 [8.0-13.0]). 5 key findings →

Participants: 260,200 Evidence: low

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

Characteristics and performance of a modified version of the ADCS-CGIC CIBIC+ for mild cognitive impairment clinical trials

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders 2009-07-01

Change detected by the MCI-CGIC was associated with baseline clinical severity and with change in clinical ratings over 6 and 12 months, supporting the validity of a CGIC approach in MCI. 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

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

Elevated amyloid beta peptides and total tau in cerebrospinal fluid in individuals with Creatine transporter deficiency

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Molecular genetics and metabolism reports 2023-08-21

Creatine transporter deficiency (CTD) is a rare X-linked disorder of creatine transport caused by pathogenic variants in SLC6A8 (Xq28). 4 key findings →

Participants: 12 Evidence: moderate

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

Molecular neuropsychology: creation of test-specific blood biomarker algorithms

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders 2013-01-03

Prior work on the link between blood-based biomarkers and cognitive status has largely been based on dichotomous classifications rather than detailed neuropsychological functioning. 1 key finding →

Participants: 395 Evidence: low

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

A combination of long- and short-read genomics reveals frequent p-arm breakpoints within chromosome 21 complex genomic rearrangements

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Genetics in medicine open 2024-06-28

Our results provide further insights into the architecture and underlying mechanisms of complex rearrangements on acrocentric chromosomes. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Impact of race/ethnicity and area deprivation index on Alzheimer’s disease and related disorders biomarkers in the POINTER Cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2024-12-01

The analyses of the community‐based U.S. POINTER indicate that AA/B individuals present differences in AD and related dementia biomarker values. nHW had higher fully adjusted cognitive scores. 5 key findings →

Participants: 644 Evidence: low

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

Practical Considerations in the Administration of Aducanumab for the Neurologist

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 35 out of 100. Neurology. Clinical practice 2022-04-01

Aducanumab (Aduhelm), developed by the biotechnology firm Biogen in Cambridge, MA, was approved using the less common accelerated approval pathway by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) reserved for treatments that fill a significant unmet need. 1 Its approval on June 7, 2021, has been met with an outpouring of opinions from prescribers, insurers, advocacy groups, and hospital systems regarding its risk-benefit profile. 2-4 Originally approved for all forms of Alzheimer disease (AD), the FDA updated aducanumab's labeling on July 8, 2021, for "treatment in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild dementia stage of disease, the population in which treatment was initiated in clinical trials." 5 With 6 million people nationally in the United States who suffer from AD and an anticipated one-third of those who may now fulfill the criteria under the revised labeling, the implicat

Evidence: low

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

↑ 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