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

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 501–525 of 1,335 studies published 2020 (page 21 of 54) · 27,380 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.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 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.

TREM2 activation attenuates neuroinflammation and neuronal apoptosis via PI3K/Akt pathway after intracerebral hemorrhage in mice

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of neuroinflammation 2020-05-28

Neuroinflammation is an important host defense response to secondary brain injury after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). 4 key findings →

Participants: 216 Evidence: low

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

Sequence of Alzheimer disease biomarker changes in cognitively normal adults: A cross-sectional study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Neurology 2020-09-01

Cross-sectional data, including CSF analytes, molecular imaging of cerebral fibrillar β-amyloid (Aβ) with PET using the [ 11 C] benzothiazole tracer Pittsburgh compound B (PiB), MRI-based brain structures, and clinical/cognitive outcomes harmonized from 8 studies, collectively involving 3,284 cognitively normal individuals 18 to 101 years of age, were analyzed. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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

The Medical Genome Reference Bank contains whole genome and phenotype data of 2570 healthy elderly

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Nature communications 2020-01-23

Population health research is increasingly focused on the genetic determinants of healthy ageing, but there is no public resource of whole genome sequences and phenotype data from healthy elderly individuals. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Elecsys CSF biomarker immunoassays demonstrate concordance with amyloid-PET imaging

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2020-03-31

Strong concordance between CSF biomarkers and Aβ-PET status was observed overall, including for cognitively normal participants, further strengthening the association between these markers of AD neuropathological burden for both developmental research studies and for use in clinical trials. 2 key findings →

Participants: 202 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Amyloid-β misfolding as a plasma biomarker indicates risk for future clinical Alzheimer's disease in individuals with subjective cognitive decline

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2020-12-24

A panel of structure- and concentration-based plasma amyloid biomarkers may predict conversion to clinical MCI and dementia due to AD in cognitively unimpaired subjects. 3 key findings →

Participants: 203 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Spread of pathological tau proteins through communicating neurons in human Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Nature communications 2020-05-26

Tau is a hallmark pathology of Alzheimer's disease, and animal models have suggested that tau spreads from cell to cell through neuronal connections, facilitated by β-amyloid (Aβ). 3 key findings →

Participants: 312 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Antidiabetic Drugs for the Risk of Alzheimer Disease in Patients With Type 2 DM Using FAERS

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias 2020-01-01

Alzheimer disease (AD) may develop after the onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and the risk of AD may depend on the antidiabetic drug administered. 2 key findings →

Participants: 85 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

COVID-19 Artificial Intelligence Diagnosis Using Only Cough Recordings

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology 2020-09-29

When validated with subjects diagnosed using an official test, the model achieves COVID-19 sensitivity of 98.5% with a specificity of 94.2% (AUC: 0.97). 5 key findings →

Participants: 19 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

An update on blood-based biomarkers for non-Alzheimer neurodegenerative disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2020-04-22

Cerebrospinal fluid analyses and neuroimaging can identify the underlying pathophysiology at the earliest stage of some neurodegenerative disorders, but do not have the scalability needed for population screening. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Topographic Distribution of Amyloid-β, Tau, and Atrophy in Patients With Behavioral/Dysexecutive Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Neurology 2020-10-22

Our results provide evidence of frontal cortical involvement of tau pathology in behavioral/dysexecutive AD and highlight the need for consensus clinical criteria in this syndrome. 5 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

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

Comparing cortical signatures of atrophy between late-onset and autosomal dominant Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. NeuroImage. Clinical 2020-11-05

Defining a signature of cortical regions of interest preferentially affected by Alzheimer disease (AD) pathology may offer improved sensitivity to early AD compared to hippocampal volume or mesial temporal lobe alone. 3 key findings →

Participants: 588 Evidence: moderate

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

↑ 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