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 3,801–3,825 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed (page 153 of 1086) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these 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.

Unadjusted, SNP RS4420638 within APOC1 was strongly associated with AD due entirely to linkage disequilibrium with APOE. 2 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 753 Evidence: moderate

Plasma beta-amyloid and white matter lesions in AD, MCI, and cerebral amyloid angiopathy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Neurology 2006-01-01

If confirmed in longitudinal studies, these data would suggest circulating beta-amyloid peptide as a novel biomarker or risk factor for microvascular damage in these common diseases of the elderly. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 54 Evidence: moderate

Rapidly progressive Alzheimer's disease features distinct structures of amyloid-β

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2015-02-15

Genetic and environmental factors that increase the risk of late-onset Alzheimer disease are now well recognized but the cause of variable progression rates and phenotypes of sporadic Alzheimer's disease is largely unknown. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Survival and mortality differences between dementia with Lewy bodies vs Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Neurology 2006-12-01

Patients with DLB had an increased risk of mortality vs patients with AD (hazard ratio [HR] 1.88, 95% CI: 1.4 to 2.5). 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 315 Evidence: moderate

Plasma apolipoprotein E and Alzheimer disease risk: the AIBL study of aging

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Neurology 2011-03-01

Analysis of cross-sectional data from the AIBL study indicates that plasma apoE levels are altered in AD and correlate with AD pathology level. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,079 Evidence: moderate

APOE-[epsilon]2 allele associated with higher prevalence of sporadic Parkinson disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Neurology 2004-06-01

Unlike Alzheimer disease, for which the APOE-epsilon4 allele increases the prevalence and the APOE-epsilon2 allele is protective, the authors' analysis shows the APOE-epsilon2 allele, but not the APOE-epsilon4 allele, to be positively associated with sporadic Parkinson disease. 3 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

Odor identification as a biomarker of preclinical AD in older adults at risk

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Neurology 2017-06-28

These findings from healthy high-risk older individuals suggest that OI reflects degree of preclinical AD pathology, while its relationships with age and cognition result from the association of these latter variables with such pathology. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 101 Evidence: moderate

Cholesterol, APOE genotype, and Alzheimer disease: an epidemiologic study of Nigerian Yoruba

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Neurology 2006-01-01

There was a significant interaction between cholesterol, APOE-epsilon4, and the risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) in the Yoruba, a population that has lower cholesterol levels and lower incidence rates of AD compared to African Americans. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,075 Evidence: moderate

Although altered lipid metabolism has been extensively implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease (AD) through cell biological, epidemiological, and genetic studies, the molecular mechanisms linking cholesterol and AD pathology are still not well understood and contradictory results have been reported. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 10,578 Evidence: moderate

Cognitively normal elderly individuals who engage in specific mentally stimulating activities even in late life have a decreased risk of incident MCI. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 973 Evidence: moderate

Persons with severe CAA compared with those without CAA were more likely to carry an APOE ε4 allele (64.9% vs 42.8%, respectively; P Conclusions and relevance Being Hispanic and having had a transient ischemic attack-like episode were predictors of CAA in persons with AD. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 193 Evidence: moderate

Dementia Prevention and Treatment: A Narrative Review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. JAMA internal medicine 2024-05-01

Although current prevention and treatment approaches to dementia have been less than optimally successful, substantial investments in dementia research will undoubtedly provide new answers to reducing the burden of dementia worldwide. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

The Ginkgo biloba special extract EGb 761 seems to produce neuroprotective effects in neurodegenerative diseases of multifactorial origin. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

AD patients treated with DHA-rich n-3 FAs supplementation increased their plasma concentrations of DHA (and EPA), which were associated with reduced release of IL-1beta, IL-6, and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor from PBMCs. 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

Despite the substantial improvement in apathy scores during the course of the study, there was no clear advantage to the reminiscence-based intervention over the time and attention, one-on-one control intervention. 3 key findings →

Participants: 37 Evidence: high

Cognitive rehabilitation (CR) is a promising treatment approach for older adults with dementia because it aims at supporting the management of day-to-day problems. 2 key findings →

Participants: 201 Evidence: high

Effective counseling and support interventions can reduce symptoms of depression in caregivers when patients are taking donepezil. 3 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high

This study questions the effect of statins on the processing of amyloid precursor protein in humans. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

Rivastigmine administration during open-label extension therapy benefited patients who had progressed slowly and those who had progressed rapidly during initial double-blind placebo treatment. 3 key findings →

Design: open-label trial Participants: 187 Evidence: high

↑ 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