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 1,276–1,300 of 1,426 studies scoring ≤ 29 out of 100 (page 52 of 58) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

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.

Artificial Intelligence for Alzheimer’s Disease Detection Across Neuroimaging and Speech: A Reproducible Cross-Modal Secondary Analysis

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-09-22

Artificial-intelligence (AI) systems for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) increasingly use neuroimaging or spontaneous speech, but reported performance is difficult to interpret across studies because cohorts, endpoints, languages, preprocessing, and validation protocols differ. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

MedBackdoorGuard: Detecting and Mitigating Backdoor Attacks in Deep Learning Models for MRI-Based Alzheimer's Disease and Mild Cognitive Impairment Diagnosis

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-09-20

Deep learning classifiers trained on structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are increasingly proposed for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), yet the pipelines that produce these models depend on shared datasets, pre-trained weights, and federated updates that an adversary can poison. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

A Multimodal Mathematical and Computational Framework for Personalized Medication-Adherence and Cognitive-Risk Modeling in Alzheimer's Disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-09-20

Digital medication-management tools for Alzheimer's disease (AD) typically record only whether a dose was taken, leaving the temporal and behavioral structure of adherence largely unused as a predictive signal. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Individual Angiotensin Receptor Blockers and Risk of Dementia: A Target Trial Emulation Study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-10-14

Of 22,025,599 individuals screened, 2,051,275 were eligible; matched cohorts ranged from 10,113 to 857,773, with median follow-up of 4.7 to 7.2 years. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Repetitive negative thinking moderates the association between self-referential thoughts and cognition amongst older adults: a natural speech analysis approach

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-09-04

Natural language processing has been examined as a possible biomarker for cognitive decline and dementia, but it has also been associated with components of well-being and psychological distress. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

A reproducibility-audit framework for generalizable versus dataset- specific molecular transition boundaries in Alzheimer’s disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-09-01

Validated on synthetic ground truth, the audit separates a generalizable anchor (PTGDS) from a dataset-specific signal and a global-expression artefact, providing a reusable control for trajectory-based molecular staging. 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Spoken Recall Reveals Lexical and Mnemonic Function Differences in Temporal Lobe Epilepsy Patients

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-08-25

We examined whether natural language processing and acoustic analysis of spoken biographical recall could identify lexical and temporal speech features associated with language and memory performance in TLE. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Conditional Latent Diffusion for Synthetic Brain MRI in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Preprocessing-Focused Pipeline

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-08-07

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) detection from structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using deep learning depends on large, labelled datasets. 1 key finding →

Participants: 295 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Antidepressant Use at the Threshold: using electronic health records to characterise people prescribed antidepressants around the time of dementia diagnosis

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2025-12-17

The high incidence of new prescribing, as well as the lack of deprescribing, points to unmet needs and a role for more proactive medication review. 3 key findings →

Participants: 3,713 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Large Language Model-Driven Prioritization of Alzheimer’s Disease Drug Targets Across Multidimensional Criteria

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2025-12-29

Large language models (LLMs) offer new opportunities to synthesize the vast and heterogeneous biomedical literature, yet their potential to support drug target prioritization in complex diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) remains largely unexplored. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

A retrieval-augmented generation large language model framework for accurate dementia identification from electronic health records

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-01-25

A RAG-based LLM pipeline without structured ICD codes improved dementia ascertainment from EHR data compared with ICD-based rules and keyword-based filtering. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Systematic Review of Population-Based Studies of Prevalence and Incidence of Aging-Associated Neurodegenerative Diseases in Russia

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-04-06

The prevalence of dementia and Parkinson’s disease in Russia varies widely depending on diagnostic method, age group, and study design. 2 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Participants: 20 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Speaker-Wise Dementia Screening fromNaturalistic Speech with Lexical Entropy, Semantic Drift, and Multimodal Fusion

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-10-21

Although advances have been made in dementia symptom management, early detection during stages when interventions are most effective remains a significant challenge. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Speaker-Attributed Transcription Toward Automated Scoring of NACC Uniform Data Set Assessments: A Whisper–Pyannote Pipeline and Pilot Evaluation

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-10-12

Standardized cognitive and functional assessments, such as those in the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC) Uniform Data Set (UDS), are central to detecting and monitoring Alzheimer’s disease, yet their administration and scoring depend on trained examiners who record and score responses by hand. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Vocal acoustic biomarkers predict amyloid positivity in non-demented individuals

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-09-11

Amyloid-β deposition begins in the earliest preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease, long before cognitive decline is detectable by standard clinical assessments, which are often limited by ceiling effects and create a need for non-invasive, scalable markers. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Alzheimer's Disease Detection via Large Pre-Trained Speech and Language Models: Taxonomy, Progress, and Open Challenges

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. PsyArXiv 2026-09-03

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) detection from spoken language has advanced considerably with the rise of large pre-trained speech and language models, including wav2vec 2.0, BERT, generative LLMs, and emerging audio-LLMs. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Five Decades of Infusion Testing in Idiopathic Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus: A Biomarker in Search of a Gold Standard

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-09-01

Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) is a potentially reversible cause of gait impairment, cognitive decline, and urinary dysfunction in older adults, yet identifying patients most likely to benefit from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion remains a major diagnostic challenge. 2 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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