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
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 276–300 of 2,826 studies · tagged Other Dementias(page 12 of 114)· 30,580 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; 16,054 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 62 out of 100.·Neurology·2011-04-27
Changes in functional connectivity in DLB indicate patterns of activation that are distinct from those seen in AD and may improve discrimination of DLB from AD and cognitively normal individuals. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2004-03-01
We performed a comprehensive cognitive, neuroimaging, and genetic study of 31 patients with primary progressive aphasia (PPA), a decline in language functions that remains isolated for at least 2 years. 3 key findings →
Graph theoretical analysis of the speech/language network showed that regions with shorter functional paths to the epicentre exhibited greater longitudinal atrophy. 4 key findings →
Our results suggest that the TREM2 p.R47H substitution is a risk factor for frontotemporal dementia and Parkinson's disease in addition to Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2010-08-01
Psychotic symptoms affect most patients with PD, with increased risk in those with higher age at onset, need for high doses of dopaminergic drugs, and probable REM sleep behavior disorder. 3 key findings →
Ubiquitin-positive, tau- and alpha-synuclein-negative inclusions are hallmarks of frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Neuron·2011-09-21
Several families have been reported with autosomal-dominant frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), genetically linked to chromosome 9p21. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Neurology·1998-12-01
The criteria ought to provide the foundation for research work into the neuropsychology, neuropathology, genetics, molecular biology, and epidemiology of these important clinical disorders that account for a substantial proportion of cases of primary degenerative dementia occurring before the age of 65 years. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Nature·2011-08-21
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a paralytic and usually fatal disorder caused by motor-neuron degeneration in the brain and spinal cord. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Nature neuroscience·2019-01-14
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are associated with loss of nuclear transactive response DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2015-02-04
For neuropsychology measures, we noted the earliest significant differences between mutation carriers and non-carriers 5 years before expected onset, when differences were significant for all measures except for tests of immediate recall and verbal fluency. 2 key findings →
Hereditary frontotemporal dementia associated with mutations in the microtubule-associated protein tau gene (MAPT) is a protean disorder. 1 key finding →
The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) are the most commonly used scales to test cognitive impairment in Lewy body disease (LBD), but there is no consensus on which is best suited to assess cognition in clinical practice and most sensitive to cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·Neurology·2005-06-01
Unsaturated fatty acids are important constituents of neuronal cell membranes and have neuroprotective, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory properties. 4 key findings →
Intronic expansion of the GGGGCC hexanucleotide repeat within the C9ORF72 gene causes frontotemporal dementia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease in both familial and sporadic cases. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2017-07-03
Neuroinflammation in the form of microglial activation is present in synucleinopathies and is a potential therapeutic target to halt or delay the neurodegenerative process. 4 key findings →
Mediterranean diet adherence is associated with lower increase in pPD probability over time and lower possible/probable pPD and PD/DLB incidence in older Mediterranean people. 5 key findings →
10 of the 2,823 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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%),
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.
1,037 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.