Why it should be "Alzheimer disease" rather than "Alzheimer's disease"

The terms "Alzheimer's disease" and "Alzheimer disease" are often used interchangeably in the biomedical literature. Yet this seemingly minor grammatical difference carries implications that extend beyond style: the possessive form, marked by the 's eponym, may imply ownership of a disease by an individual, a notion discouraged by several authoritative medical style guides and international health organizations [1]. In this article, we examine the historical emergence of the term "Alzheimer's disease", analyze the trajectories of the possessive and non-possessive eponyms in PubMed-indexed article titles from 1950 to 2025, and assess how the choice of terminology influences literature retrieval. Our analysis indicates that the possessive form has overwhelmingly dominated the literature for decades. However, searches using "Alzheimer's disease" or "Alzheimer disease" retrieve non-identical, only partially overlapping sets of records in PubMed. We argue that adopting the non-possessive form "Alzheimer disease" would improve conceptual clarity, terminological consistency, and the completeness of literature retrieval, particularly in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PubMed
Published
2025-12-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17879/freeneuropathology-2026-9132
Primary Topic
Medical and Biological Sciences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Why it should be "Alzheimer disease" rather than "Alzheimer's disease"

Georg Haase, C.Zachary Klein, Cinthya Agüero
PubMed
Medical and Biological Sciences
article

Why it should be "Alzheimer disease" rather than "Alzheimer's disease"

Georg Haase, C.Zachary Klein, Cinthya Agüero
article en

Abstract

The terms "Alzheimer's disease" and "Alzheimer disease" are often used interchangeably in the biomedical literature. Yet this seemingly minor grammatical difference carries implications that extend beyond style: the possessive form, marked by the 's eponym, may imply ownership of a disease by an individual, a notion discouraged by several authoritative medical style guides and international health organizations [1]. In this article, we examine the historical emergence of the term "Alzheimer's disease", analyze the trajectories of the possessive and non-possessive eponyms in PubMed-indexed article titles from 1950 to 2025, and assess how the choice of terminology influences literature retrieval. Our analysis indicates that the possessive form has overwhelmingly dominated the literature for decades. However, searches using "Alzheimer's disease" or "Alzheimer disease" retrieve non-identical, only partially overlapping sets of records in PubMed. We argue that adopting the non-possessive form "Alzheimer disease" would improve conceptual clarity, terminological consistency, and the completeness of literature retrieval, particularly in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

PubMedVol. 7
Inserm (FR), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Institut de Neurosciences des Systèmes (FR), MaineGeneral Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Medical and Biological Sciences
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Why it should be "Alzheimer disease" rather than "Alzheimer's disease" — Georg Haase, C.Zachary Klein, et al. · PubMed (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS