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 726–750 of 1,356 studies published 2021 (page 30 of 55) · 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.

Cross-cohort generalizability of deep and conventional machine learning for MRI-based diagnosis and prediction of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. NeuroImage. Clinical 2021-06-04

This work validates the generalizability of MRI-based classification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and controls (CN) to an external data set and to the task of prediction of conversion to AD in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 2 key findings →

Participants: 199 Evidence: moderate

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

Plasma d-glutamate levels for detecting mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease: Machine learning approaches

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) 2021-02-15

This study aimed to use peripheral plasma d-glutamate levels to differentiate patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) from healthy individuals and to evaluate its prediction ability using machine learning. 4 key findings →

Participants: 21 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Association between Inflammatory Conditions and Alzheimer's Disease Age of Onset in Down Syndrome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Journal of clinical medicine 2021-07-15

Adults with Down syndrome (DS) have an exceptionally high prevalence of Alzheimer disease (AD), with an earlier age of onset compared with the neurotypical population. 4 key findings →

Participants: 339 Evidence: low

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

Characterizing Macrophage Diversity in Metastasis-Bearing Lungs Reveals a Lipid-Associated Macrophage Subset

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Cancer research 2021-08-13

While macrophages are among the most abundant immune cell type found within primary and metastatic mammary tumors, how their complexity and heterogeneity change with metastatic progression remains unknown. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Engagement of TREM2 by a novel monoclonal antibody induces activation of microglia and improves cognitive function in Alzheimer's disease models

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Journal of neuroinflammation 2021-01-09

By engaging membrane-bound TREM2, the selected antibody was shown to promote their cellular proliferation, uptake of oligomeric beta amyloid/apoptotic neurons, and activation in a Syk and Akt dependent manner. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Acute Trem2 reduction triggers increased microglial phagocytosis, slowing amyloid deposition in mice

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2021-07-01

Heterozygous genetic variants within the TREM2 gene show a strong association with increased Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Multi-tissue neocortical transcriptome-wide association study implicates 8 genes across 6 genomic loci in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Genome medicine 2021-05-04

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is an incurable neurodegenerative disease currently affecting 1.75% of the US population, with projected growth to 3.46% by 2050. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Impact of C-Reactive Protein on Cognition and Alzheimer Disease Biomarkers in Homozygous APOE ɛ4 Carriers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Neurology 2021-09-20

Previous research has shown that elevated blood C-reactive protein (CRP) is associated with increased Alzheimer disease (AD) risk only in APOE ε4 allele carriers; the objective of this study was to examine the interactive effects of plasma CRP and APOE genotype on cognition and AD biomarkers. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Plan switching among Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with Alzheimer's disease and other dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia Translational Research & Clinical Interventions 2021-01-01

Among non-dually eligible beneficiaries, 9.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.0, 9.1) with ADRD disenrolled while 19.7% (95% CI: 19.6, 19.9) switched plans within MA compared to a disenrollment rate of 4.2% (95% CI: 4.2, 4.2) and switching rate of 22.8% (95% CI: 22.9, 22.8) for persons without ADRD. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Area‐level deprivation is associated with rate of memory decline in late life within a community‐based cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

Even after accounting for established individual‐level demographic, socioeconomic, health, and genetic risk factors for cognitive decline, greater neighborhood disadvantage is associated with an accelerated rate of annualized decline in delayed recall performance across mid to late life in a community sample. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,554 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Use of antipsychotics in Denmark 1997-2018: a nation-wide drug utilisation study with focus on off-label use and associated diagnoses

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences 2021-04-06

We aimed to explore diagnoses associated with antipsychotic use, treatment patterns and characteristics of users without diagnoses relevant to antipsychotic treatment. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Exploring Differential Perceptions and Barriers to Advance Care Planning in Dementia among Asian Patient-Caregiver Dyads-A Mixed-Methods Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. International journal of environmental research and public health 2021-07-04

A parallel mixed-methods study on 20 patient-caregiver dyads in an Asian population was conducted to explore the differential perceptions and barriers to ACP in dementia. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Characterization of pre-analytical sample handling effects on a panel of Alzheimer's disease-related blood-based biomarkers: Results from the Standardization of Alzheimer's Blood Biomarkers (SABB) working group

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2021-11-29

We constructed a standardized operating procedure for plasma handling, to facilitate introduction of blood-based biomarkers into the research and clinical settings. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Untangling the association of amyloid-β and tau with synaptic and axonal loss in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2021-02-01

It is currently unclear how amyloid-β and tau deposition are linked to changes in synaptic function and axonal structure over the course of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →

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 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