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 751–775 of 7,821 studies · tagged Brain Biology(page 31 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Metabolites·2026-08-07
Gut microbial metabolites serve as functional mediators of gut–brain communication, linking microbial alterations to neurodegenerative pathology. 5 key findings →
18F-MK-6240 (18F-labeled 6-(fluoro)-3-(1H-pyrrolo[2,3-c]pyridin-1-yl)isoquinolin-5-amine) is a highly selective, subnanomolar-affinity PET tracer for imaging neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs). 4 key findings →
Breakdown of the neurovascular unit is associated with blood-brain barrier (BBB) leakiness contributing to cognitive decline and disease pathology in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Nature communications·2024-03-23
Blood phosphorylated tau (p-tau) biomarkers, including p-tau217, show high associations with Alzheimer's disease (AD) neuropathologic change and clinical stage. 1 key finding →
Blood-based biomarkers such as tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (phosphorylated-tau181) represent an accessible, cost-effective and scalable approach for the in vivo detection of Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology. 5 key findings →
In the tea-consuming group, the MoCA scores ( P = 0.000), Hopkins Verbal Learning Test (HVLT) immediate recall ( P = 0.012) and delayed recall ( P = 0.013) were significantly higher while Trail Making Test-B ( P = 0.005) and Victoria Stroop test interference ( P = 0.000) were lower. 5 key findings →
Changes in the mitochondrial DNA copy number (mtDNAcn) and increased mitochondrial DNA mutation burden have both been associated with neurodegenerative diseases and cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·1999-05-01
The combined measure of CSF Abeta42 and tau meets the requirements for clinical use in discriminating AD from normal aging and specific neurologic disorders. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2015-07-15
Our findings suggest that inflammation in the CNS increases in normal aging and is intimately related to markers of neurodegeneration in the preclinical stages of AD and SNAP. sAPPβ and β-secretase activity are not useful diagnostic or staging markers in preclinical AD. 2 key findings →
Individuals with neuropsychiatric, cardiovascular, and sensory impairment/cancer patterns are at increased risk for dementia and APOE ε4, and inflammation may further increase the risk. 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disease most often associated with memory deficits and cognitive decline, although less common clinical presentations are increasingly recognized. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·1988-08-01
We detected large numbers of HLA-DR-positive reactive microglia (macrophages), along with Lewy bodies and free melanin, in the substantia nigra of all cases studied with Parkinson's disease (5) and parkinsonism with dementia (PD) (5). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·F1000Research·2018-07-31
Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia worldwide, with the prevalence continuing to grow in part because of the aging world population. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-05-01
CLBs detected by alpha-synuclein antibodies in patients with PD are a more sensitive and specific correlate of dementia than the presence of Alzheimer's pathology, which was present in a minority of the cases in this series. 1 key finding →
Early reports of cognitive and behavioural deficits in motor neuron disease might have been overlooked initially, but the concept of a frontotemporal dementia-motor neuron disease continuum has emerged during the past decade. 5 key findings →
The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a continuous endothelial membrane within brain microvessels that has sealed cell-to-cell contacts and is sheathed by mural vascular cells and perivascular astrocyte end-feet. 1 key finding →
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.