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 1,851–1,875 of 2,146 studies · tagged Early Stage(page 75 of 86)· 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.
These results agree with a persistent inflammatory status in AD, reinforcing the hypothesis of a progressive impairment of the immune response in this disorder and suggesting that monocytes may be good targets to study the progression from MCI to AD. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Global Transitions·2025-08-07
Exposure to accelerated epigenetic aging was significantly associated with a higher risk of transition from NC to MCI as well as progression from MCI to dementia. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Network Neuroscience·2025-01-01
A network neuroscience perspective can significantly advance the understanding of neurodegenerative disorders, particularly frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 5 key findings →
could serve as potential biomarkers for NAFLD-associated mild cognitive impairment; 3) bacterial metabolic functions involved in sugar degradation and the breakdown of tryptophan and glutamate were downregulated and linked to CXCL13 plasma levels and neuroinflammation; 4) correlations between SCFA concentrations disappeared with liver disease and cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Cureus·2025-08-03
Mild cognitive impairment progresses slowly and may be reversible, providing a window of opportunity for intervention before it progresses to Alzheimer's disease, at which point treatments, at best, ameliorate symptoms with little efficacy towards delaying disease progression. 2 key findings →
SCD participants were older, had fewer years of education, more depressive symptoms, and more subjective cognitive complaints than CU participants. 4 key findings →
The development of non-pharmacological treatment approaches is supported by evidence that addressing key modifiable risk factors may prevent or delay up to 45% of dementia cases. 5 key findings →
A total of 800 questionnaires were sent out in this survey, and 778 were effectively collected, with an effective recovery rate of 97.25%. 5 key findings →
BackgroundStructural changes in medial temporal lobes including the fusiform gyrus, a critical area in face recognition, precede the progression of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Brain and Cognition·2025-06-24
White matter hyperintensities (WMHs) and cerebral β-amyloid (Aβ) have been characterized as clinically significant biomarkers associated with greater cognitive decline and incidence of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·PloS one·2011-06-15
Tauopathies are neurodegenerative disorders characterized by the accumulation of abnormal tau protein leading to cognitive and/or motor dysfunction. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·PloS one·2015-11-05
The perforant pathway projection from layer II of the entorhinal cortex to the hippocampal dentate gyrus is especially important for long-term memory formation, and is preferentially vulnerable to developing a degenerative tauopathy early in Alzheimer's disease (AD) that may spread over time trans-synaptically. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·PloS one·2016-03-18
Virtual Reality (VR) has emerged as a promising tool in many domains of therapy and rehabilitation, and has recently attracted the attention of researchers and clinicians working with elderly people with MCI, Alzheimer's disease and related disorders. 3 key findings →
Though both traditional and computer-based cognitive intervention programmes seem to be effective, the computer-based ones present more advantages: 1) they could individualize the programme tailored to the patient's neuropsychological pattern and needs. 2) they permit the user to make an immediate objective comparison with data collected earlier and thus help in setting up a systematic training plan by providing instant value-free feedback. 3) they offer a possibility of a widescale dissemination. 2 key findings →
Physical and cognitive idleness constitute significant risk factors for the clinical manifestation of age-related neurodegenerative diseases. 3 key findings →
Aging is associated with cognitive decline, yet this does not prevent older adults from finding ways to compensate for age-related deficits. 4 key findings →
9 of the 2,141 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.
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.