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
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 1,351–1,375 of 1,787 studies · tagged Diagnosis(page 55 of 72)· 27,780 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; 13,259 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.
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurological condition that affects millions of individuals around the world and for which there are few effective therapies. 1 key finding →
Exploratory factor analysis revealed the orientation/spatial cognitive function (orientation and spatial cognition) and attention/executive function (attention, memory, and execution) factors. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Cureus·2021-07-26
Tau protein plays a vital role in maintaining the structural and functional integrity of the nervous system; however, hyperphosphorylation or abnormal phosphorylation of tau protein plays an essential role in the pathogenesis of several neurodegenerative disorders. 1 key finding →
Given the fact that different types of dementia can be diagnosed only postmortem or when the disease has progressed enough to cause irreversible damage to certain brain areas, there has been an increasing need for the development of sensitive and reliable methods that can detect early preclinical forms of dementia, before the symptoms have even appeared. 1 key finding →
The vessel parameters [P vessel length density=0.005 and P vessel perfusion density=0.006) and average choroid thickness (P<0.001) in the macular area of the ATD group was less than the control group. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder impacting cognition, function, and behavior in the elderly population. 2 key findings →
Older adults with a new dementia diagnosis were 2.8 times more likely to reduce alcohol consumption than those without such a diagnosis. 5 key findings →
An accurate diagnosis of sporadic cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is critical for patient management and research (including clinical trials) for this common small vessel pathology of the brain. 5 key findings →
Hispanics and Asians diagnosed with dementia had 40% lower mortality risk and African Americans had 13% lower mortality risk than Whites. 5 key findings →
Patients with prior AD diagnosis used substantially more medical services every year until their VD/PD diagnosis, resulting in incremental annual medical costs of approximately $9,500-$14,000. 4 key findings →
A new Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) designed specifically for rating depression in the elderly was tested for reliability and validity and compared with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRS-D) and the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS). 3 key findings →
Health screening is an important component of health promotion programs, and countries have promoted general health screening targeting the prevention and early management of common chronic diseases. 5 key findings →
Although the use of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) amyloid β1-42 (Aβ42), tau (T-tau), and phosphorylated tau (p-tau181) gives added diagnostic and prognostic values, the diffusion is still limited in clinical practice and only a restricted number of patients receive an integrated clinico-biological diagnosis. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·CNS drugs·2010-05-01
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is a clinically and pathologically heterogeneous syndrome, characterized by progressive decline in behaviour or language associated with degeneration of the frontal and anterior temporal lobes. 4 key findings →
There is demand on community pathologists to perform autopsies to confirm the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease, the most common cause of dementia in our increasingly aging society. 5 key findings →
Intracranial vasculitis, or primary angiitis of the central nervous system (PACNS), is an uncommon, often fatal disorder that frequently responds to aggressive immunosuppressive therapy. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Age and ageing·1990-03-01
The distribution of scores in the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) of women aged 70-79 years from a rural area of Cambridgeshire is reported. 2 key findings →
Age, sex, functional and cognitive impairment and the diagnosis of pneumonia or congestive heart failure were the strongest predictors of death. 1 key finding →
10 of the 1,775 studies in this tag, 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%),
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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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.