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
30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 7,551–7,575 of 8,338 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 303 of 334)· 30,180 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; 15,654 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.
According to the amyloid hypothesis, accumulation of amyloid beta-peptide (A beta) in the brain is the primary pathogenic event in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
The development of oxidative stress, in which production of highly reactive oxygen species (ROS) overwhelms antioxidant defenses, is a feature of many neurological diseases: ischemic, inflammatory, metabolic and degenerative. 5 key findings →
The amyloid fibrils deposited in Alzheimer's neuritic plaque cores and cerebral blood vessels are mainly composed of aggregated forms of a unique peptide, 39-42 amino acids long, named amyloid beta (A beta). 5 key findings →
Previously, we demonstrated in cultured dorsal root ganglion neurons that, in the presence of beta-migrating very low density lipoproteins (beta-VLDL), apolipoprotein (apo) E4, but not apoE3, suppresses neurite outgrowth. 3 key findings →
The standardization and clinical validation of the measurement of beta-amyloid(1-42) (Abeta42) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), plasma and urine is described using a commercially available sandwich-type ELISA with 21F12 and 3D6 as monoclonal antibodies. 1 key finding →
Amyloid-β (Aβ) immunotherapy for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has good preclinical support from transgenic mouse models and clinical data suggesting that a long-term treatment effect is possible. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2007-07-20
The inflammatory cytokines can initiate nerve cell degeneration and enhance the plaque production typically found in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
The proteolytic processing of human amyloid precursor protein (APP) into shorter aggregating amyloid β (Aβ)-peptides, e.g., Aβ1-42, is considered a critical step in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Neurochemical dementia diagnostics (NDD) can significantly improve the clinically based categorization of patients with early dementia disorders, and the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of amyloid beta peptides ending at the amino acid position of 42 (A beta x-42 and A beta 1-42) are widely accepted biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
A major histopathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the presence of amyloid deposits in the parenchyma of the amygdala, hippocampus, and neocortex. 1 key finding →
Genetic and lifestyle-related risk factors for Alzheimer disease (AD) are associated with an increase in oxidative stress, suggesting that oxidative stress is involved at an early stage of the pathologic cascade. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2005-02-17
Clinical and epidemiological studies have found that type 2 diabetes, and hyperinsulinaemia, increased the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the elderly. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2006-06-16
Thinning and discontinuities within the vascular basement membrane (VBM) are associated with leakage of the plasma protein prothrombin across the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Cell·1995-07-01
The secreted form of beta-amyloid precursor protein (APP) containing the Kunitz proteinase inhibitor (KPI) domain, also called protease nexin II, is internalized and degraded by cells. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease is associated with a disruption of amyloid β (Aβ) homeostasis, resulting in the accumulation and subsequent deposition of Aβ peptides within the brain. 5 key findings →
10 of the 8,313 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 30,180 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 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%),
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 (3.4% 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.