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

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–18 of 18 studies with an author at Hospital Clínico San Carlos (ES) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

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; 12,859 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 analysis of dementia and its clinical endophenotypes reveal novel loci associated with Alzheimer's disease and three causality networks: The GR@ACE project

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2019-08-28

The regulation of vasculature is a prominent causal component of probable AD. 3 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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

Effect of Milk and Other Dairy Products on the Risk of Frailty, Sarcopenia, and Cognitive Performance Decline in the Elderly: A Systematic Review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) 2019-05-01

Nutrition is a modifiable factor potentially related to aging. 3 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 661 Evidence: high

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

Comparison of an Energy-Reduced Mediterranean Diet and Physical Activity Versus an Ad Libitum Mediterranean Diet in the Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Annals of Internal Medicine 2025-08-25

The 6-year absolute risk was 12.0% (95% CI, 11.9% to 12.1%) in the control group (349 cases) and 9.5% (CI, 9.4% to 9.5%) in the intervention group (280 cases). 5 key findings →

Participants: 4,746 Evidence: high

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

Mortality risk after dementia diagnosis by dementia type and underlying factors: a cohort of 15,209 patients based on the Swedish Dementia Registry

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2014-01-01

Knowledge on survival in dementia is crucial for patients and public health planning. 4 key findings →

Participants: 15,209 Evidence: moderate

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

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of five cross-cultural cognitive screening instruments for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in a multicultural memory clinic sample

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer s Disease 2025-06-22

BackgroundWith the changing demographic landscape in most countries worldwide, early identification of cognitive impairment in multicultural populations is increasingly relevant. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 187 Evidence: low

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

A New Mediterranean Lifestyle Pyramid for Children and Youth: A Critical Lifestyle Tool for Preventing Obesity and Associated Cardiometabolic Diseases in a Sustainable Context

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Advances in Nutrition 2025-01-22

Cardiovascular disease risk factors begin in childhood and track into adulthood, increasing the possibility of impaired cardiometabolic health. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Amyloid and FDG-PET study of logopenic primary progressive aphasia: evidence for the existence of two subtypes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Journal of neurology 2015-04-11

The logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA) has been associated with Alzheimer disease, although this relationship is still subject to debate. 4 key findings →

Participants: 16 Evidence: moderate

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

Peripheral levels of glutathione and protein oxidation as markers in the development of Alzheimer's disease from Mild Cognitive Impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Free radical research 2008-02-01

There is a great interest in the relationship between Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and the progression to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Participants: 34 Evidence: low

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

Retinal ganglion cell vulnerability to pathogenic tau in Alzheimer’s disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Acta Neuropathologica Communications 2025-02-15

Using the RGC marker ribonucleic acid binding protein with multiple splicing (RBPMS) and Nissl staining, we found a 46–56% reduction in RBPMS + RGCs and Nissl + neurons in the ganglion cell layer (GCL) of MCI and AD retinas ( P < 0.05–0.001). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Appropriate use recommendations of the Spanish Society of Neurology’s Behavioural Neurology and Dementia Study Group on anti-amyloid antibodies in the treatment of Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Neurología (English Edition) 2026-05-01

The introduction of the first anti-amyloid mAb represents a paradigm shift in the management of AD, but is not free of challenges. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Genetic associations with EEG signatures in mild cognitive impairment: insights into Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-08-28

Genome-wide genotypes were quality-controlled, imputed, functionally annotated (yielding 16,935 gene regions comprising 90,607 functional variants), and associated with latent EEG features using Bayesian reduced rank regression. 5 key findings →

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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.

1,032 records (3.8% 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