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 151–175 of 226 studies with an author at Brown University (US) (page 7 of 10) · 27,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 226 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.

Pain Impacting Quality of Life in Persons with Dementia Dying in the Nursing Home by Alternative Medicare Payment Model

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Journal of Palliative Medicine 2022-06-08

There were 115,757 NH residents with dementia who self-reported pain in the last 30 days of life. 5 key findings →

Participants: 20,585 Evidence: low

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

PROFILE OF DECEDENTS FROM A NATIONAL COHORT OF ASSISTED LIVING RESIDENTS

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2022-11-01

An increasing number of older adults reside in assisted living (AL) toward the end of life, and it remains unclear if this trend represents an additional place of care and end-of-life transition before eventual nursing home admission. 1 key finding →

Design: cohort study Participants: 273,722 Evidence: moderate

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

Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2026-05-01

Among 5757 participants (21.7% Black, 20.3% Latinx, 58.1% AORE), we found lower odds of amyloid positivity in Black (odds ratio [OR]: 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.83) and Latinx (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.91) compared to AORE. 4 key findings →

Participants: 5,757 Evidence: moderate

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

Recommended best practices for construct-centered adaptation of the Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. The Journals of Gerontology Series B 2025-10-24

Recommendations for HCAP adaptation include phases of preparation (assembling local expert teams; resource planning), implementation (construct-centered adaptation guided by local experts), pre-testing (iterative, mixed-methods approach), and field preparation (creating documentation; interviewer training; planning for ongoing quality assurance). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Dissociable spatial topography of cortical atrophy in early‐onset and late‐onset Alzheimer's disease: A head‐to‐head comparison of the LEADS and ADNI cohorts

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-02-01

After controlling for the level of cognitive impairment, we found a double dissociation between AD clinical phenotype and localization/magnitude of atrophy, characterized by predominant neocortical involvement in EOAD and more focal anterior medial temporal involvement in LOAD. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Relationship Between Perceived and Objective Financial Abilities Among Older Adults: Results From the Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly Cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. The Gerontologist 2025-04-07

In years when older adults subjectively reported fewer difficulties with their finances, they objectively performed better at financial tasks and this relationship became stronger over 10 years. 5 key findings →

Participants: 2,802 Evidence: low

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

Better Assessment of Illness Study (BASIL) II for Delirium Severity: Study Design, Variables, and Methods

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology 2025-05-16

PurposeDelirium is a common yet preventable complication of hospitalization, surgery and illness that is associated with poor outcomes. 1 key finding →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

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

Variations in Medicare Advantage Switching Rates Among African American and Hispanic Medicare Beneficiaries With Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias, by Sex and Dual Eligibility

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. The Journals of Gerontology Series B 2022-09-08

The study included 2,284,175 FFS Medicare beneficiaries with an ADRD diagnosis in 2017. 5 key findings →

Participants: 2,284,175 Evidence: low

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

Acceptable standards for clinic‐based digital cognitive assessments: Recommendations from the Global CEO Initiative on Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

The rising prevalence of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia, combined with persistent underdiagnosis, is driving an increased need for scalable cognitive assessment tools. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Trends in Assisted Living and Memory Care Supply From 2019 to 2023

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 2025-09-30

Describe geographic variation from 2019 to 2023 in assisted living (AL) and memory care supply, and its correlation with county-level characteristics. 2 key findings →

Participants: 1,000 Evidence: low

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

Therapeutic rescue of neurodegeneration in experimental type 3 diabetes: relevance to Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2006-09-01

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with major impairments in insulin and insulin-like growth factor (IGF) gene expression and signaling in the brain. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Sample size estimates for biomarker-based outcome measures in clinical trials in autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease 2025-03-20

Alzheimer disease (AD)-modifying therapies are approved for treatment of early-symptomatic AD. 4 key findings →

Participants: 200 Evidence: low

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

Cost–Benefit Analysis of the COPE Program for Persons Living With Dementia: Toward a Payment Model

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2021-10-16

Per-dyad mean cost savings at 12 months were $2 354 for those who received COPE with a mean difference-in-difference of -$6 667 versus HCBS alone (95% CI: -$15 473, $2 734; not statistically significant). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Changes in the agreement between the Minimum Data Set and hospital Medicare claims measures of dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2021-04-30

The agreement between the two measures of dementia differed by age: in 2017, 79.2% of hospital claims for patients aged 66–74 had a diagnosis of dementia compared to older age categories that had dementia noted in over 85% of records. 5 key findings →

Participants: 1,273,348 Evidence: low

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

The National Dementia Workforce Study: Methods for Surveying Community Clinicians Who Provide Care to People With Dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2025-08-08

People with dementia have complex medical, functional, and social needs and experience highly variable care quality and outcomes across the U.S. health care system. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol: What makes an HCAP an HCAP? An adaptive architecture for measuring cognitive aging around the world

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. The Journals of Gerontology Series B 2025-10-18

To balance high-quality measurement of cognitive domains and maintain the ability to perform meaningful cross-national comparisons, each HCAP should include a common set of at least three to four continuously distributed test items per domain that can link domains across studies. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Genetic modification of the phenotypes produced by amyloid precursor protein overexpression in transgenic mice

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Human molecular genetics 1997-10-01

Overexpression of Alzheimer amyloid precursor protein (APP) produces dramatically different phenotypes in transgenic mice depending on the genetic background. 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