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 576–600 of 2,826 studies · tagged Other Dementias(page 24 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.
A large body of evidence suggests that not only cerebral but also systemic oxidative stress (OxS) might be involved in the pathogenesis of late onset Alzheimer’s disease (LOAD) and vascular dementia (VAD), as well as of the prodromal phase of dementia, the so-called mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 5 key findings →
Serum GFAP is increased in FTLD, correlates with cognition and GABAergic deficits, and thus shows promise as a biomarker of disease severity in FTLD. 3 key findings →
Rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is diagnosed by a clinical history of dream enactment accompanied by polysomnographic rapid eye movement sleep atonia loss (rapid eye movement sleep without atonia). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2018-11-01
Accumulation of alpha-synuclein (ASYN) in neurons and other CNS cell types may contribute to the underlying pathology of synucleinopathies including Parkinson's disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and Multiple Systems Atrophy (MSA). 3 key findings →
Defective visual information processing from both central and peripheral pathways is one of the suggested mechanisms of visual hallucination in Parkinson's disease (PD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Eye and brain·2020-07-14
Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) has emerged as a novel, fast, safe and non-invasive imaging technique of analyzing the retinal and choroidal microvasculature in vivo. 5 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.·Archives of neurology·2001-11-01
An international group of clinical and basic scientists participated in the Frontotemporal Dementia and Pick's Disease Criteria Conference at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md, on July 7, 2000, to reassess clinical and neuropathological criteria for the diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Sleep medicine·2013-01-22
The vast majority of men > or =50 years old initially diagnosed with iRBD in this study eventually developed a parkinsonian disorder/dementia, often after a prolonged interval from onset of iRBD, with the mean interval being 14 years while the range extended to 29 years. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·1995-06-01
We followed 828 nondemented residents of Hisayama Town, Kyushu, Japan, aged 65 years or older (88.3% of the elderly population) for 7 years starting in 1985 in order to determine the type-specific incidence of dementia and its risk factors in the general Japanese population. 2 key findings →
✓ 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 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.