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 476–500 of 572 studies with an author at University of Pennsylvania (US) (page 20 of 23) · 28,580 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.

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

How experienced psychiatrists view the capacity of patients with Alzheimer disease for consenting to research and for appointing a proxy may be related to the patients' conceptualization and memory functioning. 1 key finding →

Participants: 77 Evidence: high

Mutations in the human Cu,Zn superoxide dismutase gene (SOD1) are found in 20% of kindreds with familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The Alzheimer amyloid precursor protein (APP) undergoes complex processing resulting in the production of a 4-kDa amyloid peptide (A beta) which has been implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Acetylated tau neuropathology in sporadic and hereditary tauopathies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. The American journal of pathology 2013-08-01

We have recently shown acetylation of tau at lysine residue 280 (AC-K280) to be a disease-specific modification in Alzheimer disease (AD), corticobasal degeneration, and progressive supranuclear palsy, likely representing a major regulatory tau modification. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Eight antisera and one monoclonal antibody to synthetic peptides that corresponded to domains extending over the entire length of the beta-amyloid precursor protein (beta-APP), and an antiserum to the full-length 695-amino acid form of the beta-APP, were raised to probe the composition of the core and corona of senile plaques (SPs). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid values of total tau (T-tau) and β-amyloid 1-42 (Aβ 1-42) obtained using the Innotest enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay were transformed using a linear regression model to equivalent values obtained using the INNO-BIA AlzBio3 (xMAP; Luminex) assay. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Can MRI screen for CSF biomarkers in neurodegenerative disease?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Neurology 2012-12-26

Alzheimer disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) may have overlapping clinical presentations despite distinct underlying neuropathologies, thus making in vivo diagnosis challenging. 4 key findings →

Participants: 185 Evidence: low

Of 15,390 narratives collected from 3139 patients with PsA for exploratory analysis, physical concepts were the most common (81.5%), followed by emotional (50.7%), cognitive (20.0%), role activity (8.1%), and social (5.6%) concepts. 5 key findings →

Participants: 3,139 Evidence: low

Older patients with kidney failure residing in high-disadvantage neighborhoods, particularly Black patients and those in suburban, rural, or small-town areas, had a higher risk of ADRD compared with those in low-disadvantage neighborhoods. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

This paper reports on a Conference organized by the Washington University School of Medicine's (WUSM) Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC), entitled "Enhancing Participation by Minoritized Groups in Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementia (ADRD) Research." 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The cognitive assessment protocol of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) was designed to evaluate the reliability and validity of cognitive assessment measures that might be valuable additions to the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS) or other concise batteries used in antidementia drug trials.

Attention to three themes may help clinicians and investigators meet the challenge of treating the common mental disorders of later life: the effect of these disorders on functioning, prevention of the consequences of mental disorders, and integration of mental health care and primary health care services. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Machine-learning techniques for building a diagnostic model for very mild dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. NeuroImage 2010-04-09

Many researchers have sought to construct diagnostic models to differentiate individuals with very mild dementia (VMD) from healthy elderly people, based on structural magnetic-resonance (MR) images. 1 key finding →

Participants: 83 Evidence: low

Down syndrome is a condition caused by trisomy of chromosome 21 and is the most common genetic cause of intellectual disability. 4 key findings →

Participants: 118,539 Evidence: low

Human Alzheimer and inflammation biomarkers after anesthesia and surgery

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Anesthesiology 2011-10-01

The prevalence of postoperative cognitive disturbance, coupled with growing in vitro, cell, and animal evidence suggesting anesthetic effects on neurodegeneration, calls for additional study of the interaction between surgical care and Alzheimer neuropathology. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) show patterns of change in Alzheimer's disease (AD) that precede dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Microglia are the main human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) reservoir in the central nervous system and most likely play a major role in the development of HIV dementia (HIVD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Living in more deprived neighborhoods was associated with an accelerated disease course in bvFTD, highlighting an important socioeconomic disparity in disease prognosis. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 161 Evidence: moderate

↑ 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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 (3.6% 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