Get help now — free helplines

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 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call 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) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed 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.

Find studies

Showing 876–900 of 1,116 studies · tagged Digital Tools (page 36 of 45) · 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)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

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.

An end-to-end suite of technologies has been established for the unobtrusive and continuous monitoring of health and activity changes occurring in the daily life of older adults over extended periods of time. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Activation of the inflammasome is implicated in the pathogenesis of an increasing number of inflammatory diseases, including Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Familial Alzheimer's disease (fAD) results from mutations in the amyloid precursor protein (APP) and presenilin (PSEN1 and PSEN2) genes. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been identified as a high risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The purpose of this study was to explore how liraglutide affects AD-like pathology and cognitive function in APP/PS1/Tau triple transgenic (3 × Tg) Alzheimer disease (AD) model mice. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder for which there is no cure. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

deepDR: a network-based deep learning approach to in silico drug repositioning

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) 2019-12-01

In this study, we developed a network-based deep-learning approach, termed deepDR, for in silico drug repurposing by integrating 10 networks: one drug-disease, one drug-side-effect, one drug-target and seven drug-drug networks. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer'sdisease(AD) is characterized by deposition of amyloid-β (Aβ)plaques, neurofibrillary tangles, andneuronal loss, accompaniedbyneuroinflammation. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The complement cascade not only is an innate immune response that enables removal of pathogens but also plays an important role in microglia-mediated synaptic refinement during brain development. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Machine learning in mental health: a scoping review of methods and applications

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Psychological medicine 2019-02-12

Overall, the application of ML to mental health has demonstrated a range of benefits across the areas of diagnosis, treatment and support, research, and clinical administration. 4 key findings →

Design: narrative review Evidence: low

Confusion: delirium and dementia - a smartphone app to improve cognitive assessment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. BMJ quality improvement reports 2015-01-21

Older patients with dementia and delirium are more prone to adverse events in hospital, but formal cognitive assessment to identify these vulnerable patients on admission is often not carried out by junior doctors. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Our objective was to predict HIV-associated neurocognitive disorder (HAND) in HIV-infected people using plasma neuronal extracellular vesicle (nEV) proteins, clinical data, and machine learning. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Transcriptional regulation of the gene encoding the amyloid precursor protein (APP) may play an important role in the formation of the amyloid depositions observed in Alzheimer disease and Down syndrome patients. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

A major component of amyloid deposits found in Alzheimer disease and Down syndrome is the beta/A4 peptide, which is derived from the Alzheimer amyloid protein precursor (APP). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

This study investigated whether hospital-adopted health information technology (HIT) is associated with a reduction in the frequency of preventable emergency department (ED) visits for patients with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

9 of the 1,109 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 9. The same 9 appear here every time.

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

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 tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed