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
29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 4,276–4,300 of 8,227 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 172 of 330)· 29,780 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)
From OpenAlex; 15,255 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.
Tauopathies are the most common type of neurodegenerative proteinopathy, being characterized by cytoplasmic aggregates of hyperphosphorylated tau protein. 2 key findings →
Environmental factors such as chemicals, stress and pathogens are now widely believed to play important roles in the onset of some brain diseases, as they are associated with neuronal impairment and acute or chronic inflammation. 1 key finding →
Nutrition is known to modulate the immune system and may alter neuroinflammatory processes implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and progression of neurodegeneration. 1 key finding →
Neurodegeneration is a feature of many debilitating, incurable age-dependent diseases that affect the nervous system and represent a major threat to the health of elderly persons. 2 key findings →
Neuroinflammation is a common feature shared by neurodegenerative disorders, such as Parkinson's disease (PD), and seems to play a key role in their development and progression. 2 key findings →
These results are especially relevant when compared to previous SSD studies showing effects in behavior only after a demanding cognitive training. 4 key findings →
Our in vivo model of c9FTD/ALS is the first to robustly recapitulate hallmark features derived from both sense and antisense C9orf72 repeat-associated transcripts complete with neurodegeneration and behavioral impairments. 3 key findings →
A standardized assessment battery that captures shared characteristics of mobility and cognition seen in aging and neurodegeneration may increase comparability across research studies, detection of subtle or common reversible factors, and accelerate research progress in dementia, falls, and aging-related disabilities. 1 key finding →
Future experiments and validation studies Future research should determine the extent to which prevention of surgery-induced microgliosis and/or neurovascular unit dysfunction can prevent or ameliorate postoperative memory and attention deficits in animal models. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Life science alliance·2018-05-16
Frontotemporal dementia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients with C9orf72 mutation show cytoplasmic poly-GR and poly-PR aggregates. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Practical neurology·2017-02-02
Rapidly progressive dementia mimicking Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a relatively rare presentation but a rewarding one to become familiar with, as the potential diagnoses range from the universally fatal to the completely reversible. 5 key findings →
In vivo exploration of activated microglia in neurodegenerative diseases is achievable by Positron Emission Tomography (PET) imaging, using dedicated radiopharmaceuticals targeting the translocator protein-18 kDa (TSPO). 5 key findings →
Oxidative stress (OS) plays a critical role in the pathophysiology of several brain-related disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases and ischemic stroke, which are the major causes of dementia. 5 key findings →
These findings indicate that galantamine could be a promising treatment to improve endotoxin-induced cognitive decline and neuroinflammation in neurodegenerative diseases. 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD), a progressive neurodegenerative disease characterized by impairments of cognitive function as a result of synaptic deficits and neuronal loss, is associated with inflammation. 4 key findings →
Basal forebrain cholinergic neurons (BFCNs) are believed to be one of the first cell types to be affected in all forms of AD, and their dysfunction is clinically correlated with impaired short-term memory formation and retrieval. 1 key finding →
10 of the 8,203 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 29,780 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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%),
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.
1,037 records (3.5% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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.