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 Helpline800-272-390024 hours a day, 365 days a yearFree, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline98824/7Call 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) Helpline866-232-84849:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a weekLicensed 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
28,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 2,476–2,500 of 7,821 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 100 of 313)· 28,980 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)
From OpenAlex; 14,457 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.
Since the original description of amyloid-β plaques and tau tangles more than 100 years ago, these lesions have been considered the neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2009-06-06
While sarcasm can be conveyed solely through contextual cues such as counterfactual or echoic statements, face-to-face sarcastic speech may be characterized by specific paralinguistic features that alert the listener to interpret the utterance as ironic or critical, even in the absence of contextual information. 2 key findings →
The global population is expected to have about 131.5 million people living with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias by 2050, posing a severe health crisis. 1 key finding →
Adults with Down syndrome (DS) develop Alzheimer neurofibrillary degeneration in the brain, but the underlying molecular mechanism is unknown. 1 key finding →
Mouse trisomy 16 has been proposed as an animal model of Down syndrome (DS), since this chromosome contains homologues of several loci from the q22 band of human chromosome 21. 1 key finding →
The amyloid cascade hypothesis as the etiological underpinning of Alzheimer disease (AD) is supported by a large body of literature, the most influential of which are genetic studies of the 1980s and 1990s. Other evidence includes the neuropathology of Down syndrome, apparent toxicity of oligomeric amyloid-β (Aβ), interactions with apolipoprotein E, and the analogy of cardiac amyloidosis. 1 key finding →
Tauopathies are clinically, morphologically and biochemically heterogeneous neurodegenerative diseases characterized by the deposition of abnormal tau protein in the brain. 2 key findings →
The age-related neurodegenerative diseases exemplified by Alzheimer&hyp;s disease (AD), Lewy body diseases such as Parkinson's disease (PD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and Huntington&hyp;s disease are characterized by the deposition of abnormal forms of specific proteins in the brain. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Neurotoxicology·2019-08-01
Metals are involved in different pathophysiological mechanisms associated with neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs), including Alzheimer's disease (AD), Parkinson's disease (PD) and multiple sclerosis (MS). 2 key findings →
Since the description by Alois Alzheimer, more than 50 years have passed during which senile dementia and pre-senile dementia have been considered Alzheimer disease (AD) on the basis of their common neuropathological and clinical manifestations. 5 key findings →
Tau is a microtubule-associated protein that forms neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in the selective vulnerable long projection neurons of the cholinergic basal forebrain (CBF) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Although the two pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), senile plaques composed of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides and neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) consisting of hyperphosphorylated tau, have been studied extensively in postmortem AD and relevant animal and cellular models, the pathogenesis of AD remains unknown, particularly in the early stages of the disease where therapies presumably would be most effective. 2 key findings →
Transgenic mice made by crossing animals expressing mutant amyloid precursor protein (APPswe) to mutant presenilin 1 (PS1dE9) allow for incremental increases in Abeta42 production and provide a model of Alzheimer-type amyloidosis. 4 key findings →
10 of the 7,799 studies in this tag that have a study page, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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 tierup to 10 pts
Journal's citation recordup to 4 pts
Study designup to 12 pts
Strength of evidenceup to 5 pts
Peer-review validationup to 10 pts
How recentup to 5 pts
Sample sizeup to 4 pts
Effect reportedup to 3 pts
Studied in peopleup to 3 pts
Randomised / blindedup to 2 pts
Times citedup to 7 pts
Citations per yearup to 5 pts
Impact for its field and yearup to 6 pts
Cited by studies hereup to 6 pts
Still being citedup to 4 pts
Senior author's track recordup to 4 pts
Institution's track recordup to 3 pts
Multi-centre collaborationup to 3 pts
Indexed in PubMedup to 2 pts
Free to readup 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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%),
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.
1,038 records (3.6% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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.