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

27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1,101–1,125 of 1,139 studies published 2023 (page 45 of 46) · 27,780 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; 13,259 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.

Prognostic value of cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Neurologia 2023-04-07

We performed a retrospective analysis of the patients assessed at our memory unit for whom Alzheimer disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid biomarker results were available. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Desenvolvimento de sistema baseado na internet para orientação e telemonitoramento de usuários de prótese auditiva

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. CoDAS 2023-01-01

Improved performance and increased self-reported daily use of the hearing aid were observed after the period of guidance and telemonitoring via the system for all research participants. 4 key findings →

Participants: 43 Evidence: low

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

Spatial disparity and factors associated with dementia mortality: A cross-sectional study in Zhejiang Province, China

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Frontiers in Public Health 2023-03-24

Thirty thousand three hundred and ninety-eight deaths attributable to dementia as the underlying or related cause (multiple causes) were reported during 2015-2019. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

INDIVIDUAL AND COUNTY-LEVEL FACTORS OF SERVICE USE BY DEMENTIA FAMILY CAREGIVERS IN RURAL APPALACHIA

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2023-12-01

These findings suggest that caregivers living in rural regions may depend more on informal support for meeting basic care needs of their relative living with dementia. 3 key findings →

Participants: 163 Evidence: low

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

Geographic variation of prevalence of Alzheimer’s Disease and related dementias in the Central Appalachian region of the United States

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2023-12-01

As rural areas have lower reported ADRD prevalence compared to urban areas in spite of lower educational attainment (which should lead to higher ADRD prevalence) this argues that the true burden of ADRD is likely underestimated in areas without adequate detection resources. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The relationship between social determinants of health and hospitalization among American Indian and Alaska native older adults with and without dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2023-06-01

Understanding and addressing SDOH associated with hospitalizations among AI/AN older adults, with and without dementia, may aid in the development of strategies that reduce preventable hospitalization. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Analysis of Japanese nationwide health datasets: association between lifestyle habits and prevalence of neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia with reference to dementia-related diseases and Parkinson's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Scandinavian journal of pain 2023-07-13

Chronic pain is defined as pain that persists or recurs for more than 3 months. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Volume of the posterior and not anterior hippocampus predicts spatial memory performance in Alzheimer´s Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Alzheimer's & Dementia 2023

These results support a functional hippocampal anterior‐posterior differentiation in memory processes and further stress the importance of integrating the dissociation of the hippocampus along its long‐axis concerning functional connectivity in memory processes and dementia. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

H - 09 Neighborhood Disadvantage, Education Quality, and Cognitive Function in Community-Dwelling Black and White Older Adults with Metabolic Syndrome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 2023-10-01

Neighborhood disadvantage was selectively associated with cognitive measures heavily influenced by executive function, namely using an efficient word generation strategy, and incorporating feedback to guide problem-solving. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

HEDIS Measures for Geriatric Care Quality: Evidence, Equity, and a Governance Framework

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100. Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) 2023-01-30

The Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set provides the dominant quality measurement framework for Medicare Advantage and commercial health plans, yet HEDIS lacks validated geriatric-specific quality indicators, equitable measurement standards for diverse older adult populations, and governance controls calibrated to the high-stakes Star Ratings financial incentive context. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Interim Phase 1 multiple ascending dose results for remternetug (LY3372993) in Alzheimer's disease

⚠ Conference abstract — not peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Presented at AD/PD 2023 Conference (Gothenburg, Sweden); covered by ALZFORUM and NeurologyLive 2023-04

Eli Lilly's newer anti-amyloid antibody remternetug showed fast, dose-dependent removal of amyloid plaques in a small early trial: three-quarters of people getting the higher doses had their brain amyloid drop below the threshold used to call a scan 'positive' within about six months. 5 key findings →

Design: RCT Participants: 41 Evidence: early

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Diagnostic performance of plasma Aβ 1-42 , Aβ 1-40 and pTau 181 in the LUMIPULSE automated platform for the detection of Alzheimer disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2023-04-26

Recently-developed blood markers for Alzheimer’s (AD) detection have high accuracy but usually require ultra-sensitive analytic tools not commonly available in clinical laboratories. 4 key findings →

Participants: 136 Evidence: moderate

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

Promoting Healthy Aging: Public Health as a Leader for Reducing Dementia Risk

⚠ Report — not peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Public Policy & Aging Report 2023-07-15

It is estimated that for people aged 65 years and older, the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease was nearly double for women compared with men (Weinstein et al., 2012). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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