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

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.

This study sets out to identify novel susceptibility genes for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) in a powerful set of samples from the UK and USA (1808 LOAD cases and 2062 controls). 3 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Using a Drosophila model of Alzheimer's disease (AD), we systematically evaluated 67 candidate genes based on AD-associated genomic loci (P < 10(-4)) from published human genome-wide association studies (GWAS). 1 key finding →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Null mutations in the progranulin gene (PGRN) were recently reported to cause tau-negative frontotemporal dementia linked to chromosome 17. 2 key findings →

Participants: 378 Evidence: low

Intronic expansion of a hexanucleotide GGGGCC repeat in the chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9ORF72) gene is the major cause of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Loss-of-function mutations in progranulin (GRN) cause ubiquitin- and TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43)-positive frontotemporal dementia (FTLD-U), a progressive neurodegenerative disease affecting approximately 10% of early-onset dementia patients. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Genome-wide association studies have reported that, amongst other microglial genes, variants in TREM2 can profoundly increase the incidence of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

TDP-43 has been found in inclusion bodies of multiple neurological disorders, including amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, frontotemporal dementia, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Genetic architecture of plasma Alzheimer disease biomarkers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Human molecular genetics 2023-07-01

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Alzheimer's Disease (AD) biomarker levels have identified novel genes implicated in disease risk, onset and progression. 4 key findings →

Participants: 1,467 Evidence: low

We scanned throughout chromosome 21 to assess genetic associations with late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD) using 374 Japanese patients and 375 population-based controls, because trisomy 21 is known to be associated with early deposition of beta-amyloid (Abeta) in the brain. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Mutations in DNMT1 cause autosomal dominant cerebellar ataxia, deafness and narcolepsy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Human molecular genetics 2012-02-09

Autosomal dominant cerebellar ataxia, deafness and narcolepsy (ADCA-DN) is characterized by late onset (30-40 years old) cerebellar ataxia, sensory neuronal deafness, narcolepsy-cataplexy and dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

An association between the 19q13.2 chromosomal region and Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been reported in AD families and for sporadic AD. 5 key findings →

Participants: 36 Evidence: low

Familial frontotemporal dementia (FTD), characterized by tau-negative, ubiquitin-positive inclusions at autopsy, is linked to a chromosomal region at 17q21 (FTDU-17), encompassing the gene encoding the microtubule associated protein tau, MAPT. 2 key findings →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

Overexpression of Alzheimer amyloid precursor protein (APP) produces dramatically different phenotypes in transgenic mice depending on the genetic background. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Common diseases such as endometriosis (ED), Alzheimer's disease (AD) and multiple sclerosis (MS) account for a significant proportion of the health care burden in many countries. 3 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 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