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 176–200 of 243 studies in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience (page 8 of 10) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 243 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 amnestic mild cognitive impairment/non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment separation is not only theoretical but backed by structural imaging methods and neuropsychological tests. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

It is well known that a specific set of genetic and non-genetic risk factors contributes to the onset of Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease is a severe neurodegenerative disorder of the brain, pathologically characterized by extracellular beta-amyloid plaques, intraneuronal Tau inclusions, inflammation, reactive glial cells, vascular pathology and neuronal cell death. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Existing neurocomputational and empirical data link deficient neuromodulation of the fronto-parietal and hippocampal-striatal circuitries with aging-related increase in processing noise and declines in various cognitive functions. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The present study explores the role of cognitive reserve, executive functions, and working memory (WM) span, as factors that might explain training outcomes in cognitive status. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The use of essential oils (EOs) and their components is known since long in traditional medicine and aromatherapy for the management of various diseases, and is further increased in the recent times. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Deep neural networks have led to state-of-the-art results in many medical imaging tasks including Alzheimer's disease (AD) detection based on structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

By employing the hybridoma technique, 49 mAbs recognizing Tau (1-22), nine mAbs targeting p-Tau231, one mAb targeting p-Tau217, and two mAbs targeting p-Tau181 were developed. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alpha-synucleinopathies, such as Parkinson's disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and multiple system atrophy (MSA), are a class of neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Tauopathy Animal Models

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2022-01-25

The microtubule-associated protein tau plays an important role in tauopathic diseases such as Alzheimer's disease and primary tauopathies such as progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal degeneration. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Both reserve measures were associated with cognitive trajectories [β × time (top tertile, ref.: bottom tertile) = 0.013; 95% CI: -0.126, -0.004 (residual-based) and 0.011; 95% CI: -0.001, 0.024, (activity-based)]. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Autophagy degrades phagocytosed damaged organelles, misfolded proteins, and various pathogens through lysosomes as an essential way to maintain cellular homeostasis. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

↑ 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