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 201–218 of 218 studies with an author at National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB) (page 9 of 9) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 218 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.

Strong diagnostic performance of plasma ptau217 for CSF biomarker-defined young-onset Alzheimer disease in a diagnostically heterogeneous clinical cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Journal of neurology 2024-12-12

Plasma ptau217 has strong diagnostic performance in distinguishing CSF biomarker-defined AD in a clinically relevant, younger cohort of people with symptoms, adding further weight for a simple diagnostic blood test for AD as a cause of a patient's symptoms. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Familial Danish dementia: co-existence of Danish and Alzheimer amyloid subunits (ADan AND A{beta}) in the absence of compact plaques

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. The Journal of biological chemistry 2005-08-09

Familial Danish dementia is an early onset autosomal dominant neurodegenerative disorder linked to a genetic defect in the BRI2 gene and clinically characterized by dementia and ataxia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Phenotypic Screening Identifies Modulators of Amyloid Precursor Protein Processing in Human Stem Cell Models of Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Stem cell reports 2017-03-09

Human stem cell models have the potential to provide platforms for phenotypic screens to identify candidate treatments and cellular pathways involved in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Independent and interactive contributions of white matter hyperintensities and Alzheimer’s disease imaging and plasma biomarkers to cognitive decline in older adults without dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Alzheimer s Research & Therapy 2026-03-30

Individual biomarkers significantly predict decline across multiple cognitive domains. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Impact of hypersexuality on spousal carers of patients with Parkinson’s disease and frontotemporal dementia: a qualitative study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. BMJ Open 2025-04-01

The thematic analysis identified 12 themes: manifestations, sexual practices, impact, control, emotional formulations, beliefs in causes of hypersexuality and attributions, relationship with the partner, dealing with hypersexuality, coping with hypersexuality, self-image, stigma and professional help-seeking. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Tools and talk: an evolutionary perspective on the functional deficits associated with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Muscle & nerve 2013-12-18

We propose that amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and frontotemporal dementia may be viewed as a failure of interlinked functional complexes having their origins in key evolutionary adaptations. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Development of a novel in‐house blood biomarker panel for early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

We have successfully generated specific high affinity monoclonal antibodies against p -Tau217, p -Tau205, and N-terminus GFAP and have confirmed that these antibodies have the necessary specificity and sensitivity for the Simoa platform. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

An additional human chromosome 21 causes suppression of neural fate of pluripotent mouse embryonic stem cells in a teratoma model

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. BMC developmental biology 2007-11-29

We demonstrate that a supernumerary chromosome 21 causes Inhibition of Neuroectodermal DIfferentiation (INDI) of pluripotent ES cells. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Seeded aggregation of TDP-43 induces its loss of function and reveals early pathological signatures

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 35 out of 100. Neuron 2025-03-31

Neurodegeneration in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) results from both gain of toxicity and loss of normal function of the RNA-binding protein TDP-43, but their mechanistic connection remains unclear. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Analytical validation and amyloid-status discrimination of a high-throughput, research-use-only plasma p-Tau217 immunoassay

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv (preprint) 2026-09-02

BackgroundPlasma phosphorylated tau at threonine 217 (p-Tau217) is a leading blood-based biomarker for Alzheimers disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 449 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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