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 101–122 of 122 studies in Age and ageing (page 5 of 5) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 122 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.

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.

Platelet immunoglobulin and amyloid precursor protein as potential peripheral biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease: findings from a pilot study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Age and ageing 2012-01-17

Since cerebrospinal fluid analysis and molecular neuroimaging are not routinely used in many countries, blood biomarker molecules may be more readily applicable in a routine clinical setting. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Psychiatric illness in residential homes for the elderly: a survey in one London borough

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Age and ageing 1984-09-01

The mental state, demographic details, dependency level and presence of problem behaviours have been recorded for 438 (82%) of the residents of the 12 Part III homes, managed by the London Borough of Camden, using standard interview. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Biomarkers of Underlying Alzheimer Disease Pathology & Neuro-inflammation, But Not Peripheral Inflammation, Predict Disease Clinically-Significant Progression in Mild-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2025-12-01

Biomarkers specific to AD pathology (p-tau217, GFAP) rather than peripheral inflammation had robust prognostic value in established AD. 5 key findings →

Participants: 333 Evidence: low

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

Recent breakthroughs in blood-based biomarkers of Alzheimer disease: opportunities and challenges in older adults

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2026-07-01

Recent advances in Blood-Based Biomarkers (BBMs) are transforming the diagnostic landscape of Alzheimer Disease (AD), with plasma p-tau217 emerging as a highly accurate and scalable diagnostic marker of AD pathology. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

2632 Determining the feasibility of a TCD-NIRS protocol to measure cerebral haemodynamics in dementia, delirium, and depression

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2025-01-01

An integrated TCD-NIRS protocol was feasible in these patient groups to measure NVC, but less-so in delirium. 3 key findings →

Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 32 Evidence: low

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

198 A UNIQUE COMMUNITY POST-DIAGNOSTIC DEMENTIA SUPPORT SERVICE DELIVERED BY THE ADVANCED NURSE PRACTITIONER

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 35 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2022-10-25

Patient satisfaction outcomes range from 71 - 100% with service intervention outcomes favourably indicating the direct impact of the service, which are unmeasurable to the older adult living with dementia, and include increases in: (i) Confidence - 90%; (ii) Mood - 50% and (iii) open to talking through difficulties encountered - 87%. 3 key findings →

Participants: 67,744 Evidence: low

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

Calculating cognitive decline in delirium

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2014-06-22

The 101 CADIS patients demonstrated several new findings: (i) the mean delay between symptom onset and admission was 1.4 days; (ii) for daily attention tests, 5-digit span forward improved to baseline in a mean of 1.3 days, whereas 6-digit span improved in a mean of 5.7 days; (iii) Delirium index, a 7-question instrument for monitoring delirium [2–3] improved to baseline in a mean of 5.8 days. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

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

205 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY MODULATES GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATIONS IN COGNITIVE AGEING: RESULTS FROM THE IRISH LONGITUDINAL STUDY ON AGEING

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Age and Ageing 2016-09-01

The results support the hypothesis that engaging in physical activity can compensate for urban-rural differences in cognitive performance in ageing. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

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 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