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 11,076–11,100 of 17,283 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 444 of 692) · 30,580 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.

The efficacy of different IVIG on AD was significantly different, and only IVIG-C has been confirmed to possess significant neuroprotective effects, which are related to the inhibition of APP-MHC-I. IVIG may be a potential therapeutic for AD but further research is needed to evaluate the functional of IVIG before clinical trials of AD treatment. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Studies suggest that tau deposition starts in the anterolateral entorhinal cortex (EC) with normal aging, and that the presence of β-amyloid (Aβ) facilitates its spread to neocortex, which may reflect the beginning of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The validation of tau radioligands could improve the diagnosis of frontotemporal lobar degeneration and the assessment of disease-modifying therapies. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The mechanisms underlying accumulation of Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related tau pathology outside of the medial temporal lobe (MTL) in older adults are unknown but crucial to understanding cognitive decline. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

We investigated the effects of tau on repetition suppression, the reduction of activity for repeated stimulus presentations compared to novel stimuli. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

For AD, the pattern of regional involvement for FDG and PIB differ, but both techniques show high diagnostic accuracy and 94% case by case agreement. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Our results suggesting more advanced pathological and functional brain changes in high-educated patients with mild AD are in accordance with the brain cognitive reserve hypothesis and point out the importance of development of reliable markers of underlying AD pathology for early AD diagnostics. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease is characterized by the accumulation and deposition of plaques of β-amyloid (Aβ) peptide in the brain. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

In vivo imaging of amyloid burden with positron emission tomography (PET) provides a means for studying the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's and related diseases. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Similar amyloid-β burden in posterior cortical atrophy and Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2011-07-01

While the clinical presentation of posterior cortical atrophy is clearly distinct from typical Alzheimer's disease, neuropathological studies have suggested that most patients with posterior cortical atrophy have Alzheimer's disease with an atypical visual presentation. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Amyloid-β accumulation in the brain is thought to be one of the earliest events in Alzheimer's disease, possibly leading to synaptic dysfunction, neurodegeneration and cognitive/functional decline. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Preliminary results showed that the distribution patterns of R(1) and pAV-45 images are highly correlated with normalized FDG images, and the initial 5-min early time frame of 1-6 min is potentially useful in providing complementary FDG-like information to the amyloid plaque density by late-phase AV-45 images. 3 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

We developed a document for use with potential study participants to describe the process of amyloid imaging and the implications of amyloid imaging results; and a disclosure process with attention to ongoing monitoring of both mood and safety to receive this information. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Layers III and V exhibit clearer sublamination in area 9, while layer IV is also somewhat wider in area 46 than in area 9 (9.3% vs 6.4% of cortical thickness); the overall thickness of the cortex is the same in both areas. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The fMRI and DTI results confirmed decreased connectivity from both the PCC and hippocampus to the whole brain in MCI and AD and reduction in connectivity between these two regions, which plausibly represents an early imaging biomarker for AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The relationship of cortical structure and specific neuronal circuitry to global brain function, particularly its perturbations related to the development and progression of neuropathology, is an area of great interest in neurobehavioral science. 1 key finding →

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 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