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 26–50 of 59 studies with an author at Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL) (page 2 of 3) · 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.

Presenile dementia and cerebral haemorrhage linked to a mutation at codon 692 of the beta-amyloid precursor protein gene

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Nature genetics 1992-06-01

Several families with an early-onset form of familial Alzheimer's disease have been found to harbour mutations at a specific codon (717) of the gene for the beta-amyloid precursor protein (APP) on chromosome 21. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Updated clinical diagnostic criteria for sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2009-09-22

In recent years, a series of publications have demonstrated a potentially important role for magnetic resonance imaging in the pre-mortem diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Head trauma as a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease: a collaborative re-analysis of case-control studies. EURODEM Risk Factors Research Group

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. International journal of epidemiology 1991-01-01

A re-analysis of the data from 11 case-control studies was performed to investigate the association between head trauma and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate

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

Total tau and phosphorylated tau 181 levels in the cerebrospinal fluid of patients with frontotemporal dementia due to P301L and G272V tau mutations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2003-09-01

Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a pathologically heterogeneous group of presenile neurodegenerative disorders, with or without the deposition of hyperphosphorylated tau protein in affected brain regions. 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 18 Evidence: moderate

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

Constipation preceding stroke, dementia and Parkinson’s disease in middle-aged and older adults: a population-based cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2025-08-29

Out of 462,327 eligible participants, those with constipation were associated with higher incidence of three outcome diseases (1415/20,263 [7.0%]) than those without (18,848/442,064 [4.3%]), with adjusted hazard ratio (HR) being 1.35 [1.27-1.42]. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

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

Estimation of the genetic contribution of presenilin-1 and -2 mutations in a population-based study of presenile Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Human molecular genetics 1998-01-01

Two closely related genes, the presenilins ( PS ), located at chromosomes 14q24.3 and 1q42.1, have been identified for autosomal dominant Alzheimer disease (AD) with onset age below 65 years (presenile AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Cognitive correlates of ventricular enlargement and cerebral white matter lesions on magnetic resonance imaging. The Rotterdam Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Stroke 1994-06-01

Ventricular enlargement and white matter lesions are frequent findings on cerebral magnetic resonance imaging scans of elderly subjects. 4 key findings →

Participants: 90 Evidence: moderate

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

Determinants, MRI correlates, and prognosis of mild cognitive impairment: the Rotterdam Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2014-01-01

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) marks a transitional stage between healthy aging and dementia, but the understanding of MCI in the general population remains limited. 4 key findings →

Participants: 4,198 Evidence: low

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

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration proteinopathies have disparate microscopic patterns of white and grey matter pathology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica communications 2021-02-23

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration proteinopathies with tau inclusions (FTLD-Tau) or TDP-43 inclusions (FTLD-TDP) are associated with clinically similar phenotypes. 3 key findings →

Participants: 92 Evidence: moderate

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

Loneliness among dementia caregivers: evaluation of the psychometric properties and cutoff score of the Three-item UCLA Loneliness Scale

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Frontiers in Psychiatry 2025-04-07

One factor accounted for 79.0% of the variance in the UCLALS3; it was perfectly invariant across genders but variant at the metric level across countries. 5 key findings →

Participants: 571 Evidence: low

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

Hereditary frontotemporal dementia is linked to chromosome 17q21-q22: a genetic and clinicopathological study of three Dutch families

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Annals of neurology 1997-02-01

Hereditary frontotemporal dementia (HFTD) is a rare autosomal dominant form of presenile dementia characterized by behavioral changes and reduced speech. 2 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