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
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 5,001–5,025 of 6,987 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 201 of 280)· 28,580 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; 14,058 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.
Long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD) of hippocampal synaptic transmission represent the principal experimental models underlying learning and memory. 5 key findings →
Microribonucleic acids (miRNAs) play a pivotal role in numerous aspects of the nervous system and are increasingly recognized as key regulators in neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →
As the population ages, neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) are becoming a significant burden on patients, their families, and health-care systems. 1 key finding →
Synaptic plasticity is a cellular process involved in learning and memory whose alteration in its two main forms (Long Term Depression (LTD) and Long Term Potentiation (LTP)), is observed in most brain pathologies, including neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Drug discovery today·2016-10-27
Multiple cellular changes have been identified as being involved in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis, including mitochondrial damage, synaptic loss, amyloid beta (Aβ) production and/or accumulation, inflammatory responses, and phosphorylated tau formation and/or accumulation. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Biological research·2018-09-19
To demonstrate this hypothesis, we established abnormalities in the glucose metabolism utilizing thiamine deficiency in vitro and in vivo, and we found dramatically reduced dendrite spine density. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by neurological dysfunction, including memory impairment, attributed to the accumulation of amyloid β (Aβ) in the brain. 5 key findings →
Actin-depolymerization factor (ADF)/cofilin, a family of actin-binding proteins, are critical for the regulation of actin reorganization in response to various signals. 2 key findings →
Morphological changes of dendritic spines are strongly associated with synaptic development and synaptic plasticity, which underlies learning and memory. 1 key finding →
We found a beginning synaptic impairment (LTP deficit) at 3-4 months in the prefrontal cortex of AppNL-G-F mice that is further aggravated and extended to the hippocampus at 6-8 months. 3 key findings →
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of netrin-1 (NT-1) on amyloid-beta (Aβ)-induced impairments in learning-memory and synaptic plasticity. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·FEBS open bio·2020-01-30
Synaptic dysfunction has been implicated as an early cause of cognitive decline in neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Dozens of genes have been implicated in late onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk, but none has a defined mechanism of action in neurons. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Cell reports·2017-03-28
Synapse loss is a key feature of dementia, but it is unclear whether synaptic dysfunction precedes degenerative phases of the disease. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by Aβ-driven synaptic dysfunction in the early phases of pathogenesis. 5 key findings →
Cholinergic dysfunction has been associated with cognitive abnormalities in a variety of neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric diseases. 3 key findings →
10 of the 6,970 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%),
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.
1,034 records (3.6% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 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.