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
29,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 4,426–4,450 of 7,999 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 178 of 320)· 29,380 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; 14,855 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.
Aberrant cleavage of amyloid precursor protein (APP) by γ-secretase is closely associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). γ-secretase activating protein (GSAP) specifically promotes γ-secretase–mediated cleavage of APP. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2022-03-02
Microbial flora is investigated to be related with neuropathological conditions in Alzheimer's disease (AD), and is attracting attention as a drug discovery resource. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2023-08-24
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by the accumulation of Aβ plaques and neurofibrillary tangles, resulting in synaptic loss and neurodegeneration. 3 key findings →
The number of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and non-Alzheimer's disease (non-AD) has drastically increased over recent decades. 5 key findings →
With emerging amyloid therapies, documentation of the patient's amyloid status to confirm the etiology of a clinical diagnosis is warranted prior to instituting amyloid-based therapy. 1 key finding →
During the past ten years, over 5,000 cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were analyzed at the Reference Center for Biological Markers of Dementia (BIODEM), UAntwerp, for core Alzheimer's disease (AD) CSF biomarkers: amyloid-β peptide of 42 amino acids (Aβ1-42), total tau protein (T-tau), and tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau181P). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Molecular psychiatry·2003-03
Early clinical symptoms of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) may overlap with other neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal degeneration (FTD). 3 key findings →
The Apolipoprotein E ε4 (ApoE ε4) allele, encoding ApoE4, is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Glia·2021-02-08
Neuroinflammation is a common feature in neurodegenerative diseases, modulated by the Alzheimer's disease risk factor, apolipoprotein E (APOE). 2 key findings →
The APOE genotype is the most prominent genetic risk factor for the development of late-onset Alzheimer''s disease (LOAD); however, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. 5 key findings →
The ε4-allele variant of apolipoprotein E (ApoE4) is the strongest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease, although it only differs from its neutral counterpart ApoE3 by a single amino acid substitution. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neuron·2023-04-10
Aberrant low γ-secretase activity is associated with most of the presenilin mutations that underlie familial Alzheimer's disease (fAD). 2 key findings →
Here, we report that the acute exposure of primary cortical neurons or synaptoneurosomes to APOE4 leads to a significant decrease in global protein synthesis. 1 key finding →
Apolipoprotein (APOE) is a major risk factor of Alzheimer's disease (AD), with the E2, E3 and E4 isoforms differentially regulating the burden of AD-associated neuropathologies, such as amyloid β and tau. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·eNeuro·2023-04-26
The apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) confers the greatest genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD), wherein the ε4 allele confers an elevated risk compared with the ε3 allele. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Aging cell·2023-08-18
Although aging and apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele have been documented as two major risk factors for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD), their interaction and potential underlying mechanisms remain unelucidated. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·EMBO reports·2023-05-08
The APOE4 variant of apolipoprotein E (apoE) is the most prevalent genetic risk allele associated with late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
10 of the 7,975 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 29,380 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 29,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(63.3% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.3%),
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.