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

30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 51–75 of 265 studies in Frontiers in aging neuroscience (page 3 of 11) · 30,580 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 265 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; 16,054 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.

Effects of aerobic exercise and computer-based cognitive training on cognition, functional independence, quality of life, and salivary cortisol levels in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a randomized trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience 2026-03-16

Combining aerobic exercise with cognitive training improves clinical outcomes in older adults with MCI and may influence stress-related neurobiological pathways. 5 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 28 Evidence: high

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

Effect of aspirin use on conversion risk from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience 2025-08-06

The data of 508,107 individuals were analyzed (mean [standard deviation] age, 67.6 [10.7] years; 66.8% women and 33.2% men), and 39,318 developed Alzheimer's disease (22,572 controls and 16,746 using aspirin). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 508,107 Evidence: moderate

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

Association between periodontal disease and Alzheimer's disease: a scoping review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2025-10-15

PD may be a modifiable risk factor for AD, and periodontal interventions could contribute to AD prevention and management. 2 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 52 Evidence: moderate

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

Past, Present, and Future of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Approaches to Treat Cognitive Impairment in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Time for a Comprehensive Critical Review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2021-01-20

We here review evidence gathered for nearly a decade on non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), a less known therapeutic strategy aiming to limit cognitive decline associated with neurodegenerative conditions. 1 key finding →

Participants: 70 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Dual-task turn velocity - a novel digital biomarker for mild cognitive impairment and dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2024-02-27

Our results demonstrated that dual-task could significantly improve the ability to predict cognitive impairment based on gait parameters such as gait speed (GS) and stride length (SL). 5 key findings →

Participants: 38 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Aberrant Intrinsic Activity and Connectivity in Cognitively Normal Parkinson's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2017-06-19

The results revealed abnormally increased and decreased ALFF and ReHo in PD-CN patients within the default mode network (posterior cingulate, inferior parietal cortex, parahippocampus, entorhinal cortex), sensorimotor cortex (primary motor, pre/post-central gyrus), basal ganglia (putamen, caudate), and posterior cerebellar lobule VII, which mediates cognition. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Assessment of the Concordance and Diagnostic Accuracy Between Elecsys and Lumipulse Fully Automated Platforms and Innotest

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2021-03-04

Manual ELISA assays are the most commonly used methods for quantification of biomarkers; however, they often show inter- and intra-laboratory variability that limits their wide use. 3 key findings →

Participants: 34 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

High Cortisol and the Risk of Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease: A Review of the Literature

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2019-03-01

Clinical studies found that elevated cortisol was associated with poorer overall cognitive functioning, as well as with poorer episodic memory, executive functioning, language, spatial memory, processing speed, and social cognition; while in animals, glucocorticoid administration resulted in cognitive impairment and abnormal behavior. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Speech Analysis by Natural Language Processing Techniques: A Possible Tool for Very Early Detection of Cognitive Decline?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2018-11-13

Neuropsychological tests showed significant differences between controls and mdMCI, and between controls and eD participants; GPCog, MoCA, PF, and SF also discriminated between controls and aMCI. 5 key findings →

Participants: 96 Evidence: low

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

A bibliometric analysis of the immune system and cognitive impairment: trends from 1985 to 2024

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2025-07-28

This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive overview of research trends in immune-related cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →

Design: systematic review Participants: 3,737 Evidence: low

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

Efficacy of smartphone application-based multi-domain cognitive training in older adults without dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2023-11-23

Of 101 participants, 85 older adults without dementia (84.1%) who completed the study protocol were included in the statistical analysis. 5 key findings →

Participants: 51 Evidence: low

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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.

1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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    Where this research is being discussed: events