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 4,026–4,050 of 7,821 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 162 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.
Intracellular aggregation of the microtubule-associated protein tau into filamentous inclusions is a defining characteristic of Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Aging cell·2016-07-23
Neurodegenerative diseases are distinguished by characteristic protein aggregates initiated by disease-specific 'seed' proteins; however, roles of other co-aggregated proteins remain largely unexplored. 4 key findings →
The AD subjects showed positive correlations between CSF-T-tau and CSF-P-tau versus CSF-Mn (r(s) = 0.22, p = 0.004; r(s) = 0.18, p = 0.021). 4 key findings →
Neural autoantibodies are being increasingly detected in conjunction with neurodegenerative dementias such as Alzheimer's disease dementia (AD), yet their significance is not well clarified. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2009-10-29
It is widely known that exogenous formaldehyde exposure induces human cognitive impairment and animal memory loss; and recent studies show that formaldehyde at pathological levels induces Aβ deposition and misfolding of tau protein to form globular amyloid-like aggregates. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neuroscience·2001-01-01
We have utilised laser confocal microscopy to categorise beta-amyloid plaque types that are associated with preclinical and end-stage Alzheimer's disease and to define the neurochemistry of dystrophic neurites associated with various forms of plaques. 4 key findings →
Consistent with the recent characterization of microglial cells as macrophages, an overall picture for the unique function of these cells in CNS tissue has developed. 4 key findings →
Cells that produce interleukin-6 (IL-6) require the presence of signaling molecules since this cytokine is not normally constitutively expressed. 4 key findings →
Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection of the central nervous system (CNS) can result in neurological dysfunction with devastating consequences in a significant proportion of individuals with acquired immune deficiency syndrome. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Glia·2002-11-01
Infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is associated with a syndrome of cognitive and motor abnormalities that may develop in the absence of opportunistic infections. 4 key findings →
In 4 cases of Parkinson's disease (PD), 2 cases of Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and 3 age-matched controls, the TUNEL/ISEL method was used to detect DNA fragmentation in substantia nigra locus coeruleus and cerebral cortex [method by Gold et al. In addition, immunohistochemistry was performed for an array of apoptosis-related proteins, i.e. the recently described apoptosis specific protein cJun/AP1 (ASP), the proto-oncogenes c-Jun, c-Jun AP1, Bcl2, Bax, Bcl-x, p53, CD 95 (Fas/Apo-1) 4 key findings →
The dominant research paradigm for Alzheimer's disease has focused on amyloid-beta plaqueremoval for over three decades, producing no curative therapy despite billions of dollars ofinvestment. 2 key findings →
Progress in understanding the complexity of Alzheimer's disease informs the search for combination therapies that can successfully prevent or substantially slow the progression of the disease. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Clinical Epigenetics·2025-08-01
Blood-based biomarkers hold significant promise for the early detection and diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other dementias. 5 key findings →
Recent advances in dementia research have expanded our understanding of modifiable risk factors, with air pollution being a well-established contributor. 3 key findings →
• The new CB 2 antagonist PGN36 is able to cross the Blood-Brain Barrier. • PGN36 treatment effectively alleviates TAU P301L -induced cognitive decline . • PGN36 is able to reduce TAU protein expression levels and restore synaptic plasticity. • PGN36 modulates TAU P301L -induced pyroptosis. 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.