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

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.

C3 and C3a as indicators of complement dysregulation in tauopathies and FTLD-associated disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Immunobiology 2025-07-01

Dementia encompasses a range of neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) presenting with progressive decline in memory, cognition, language and ability to complete daily tasks. 5 key findings →

Participants: 16 Evidence: low

Vascular dementia (VaD) is a leading cause of cognitive decline and arises from heterogeneous cerebrovascular pathologies, most commonly cerebral small vessel disease and chronic cerebral hypoperfusion. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD), a major contributor to stroke, cognitive decline, and vascular dementia, accounts for around 25% of ischemic strokes and significantly impacts age-related neurological disability. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

• APOE4 carriers exhibit cerebrovascular dysfunction. • Endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) represent cell populations involved in facilitating vascular repair. • In APOE4 carriers, EPC colony count is associated with cerebral small vessel disease. • EPC colony count may indicate activation of mechanisms which protect cerebrovascular function in APOE4 carriers prior to the development of cognitive decline. 4 key findings →

Participants: 109 Evidence: low

Incidental covert cerebral small vessel disease: Detection and management

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Advanced Neurology 2025-01-16

Cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) is one of the most common vascular diseases of the brain, primarily diagnosed using magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

In part 1 of the study, the patients with CSVD showed significant differences in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT)-study, AVLT-immediate, AVLT-delay, AVLT-recognition, Trail Making Test (TMT)-A, TMT-B, and Verbal Fluency Test -fruits/vegetables compared with HCs. 5 key findings →

Participants: 104 Evidence: low

CSF Aß42 levels were lower, whereas t-tau/Aß42 and p-tau/Aß42 ratios were higher in patients with AD compared with those with FTD. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Assessment of genetic risk for improved clinical-neuropathological correlations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica communications 2020-09-10

In the clinical diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies, distinction from Alzheimer's disease is suboptimal and complicated by shared genetic risk factors and frequent co-pathology. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Rare causes of early-onset dystonia-parkinsonism with cognitive impairment: a de novo PSEN-1 mutation

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Neurogenetics 2017-06-29

Mutations in PSEN1 are responsible for familial Alzheimer's disease (FAD) inherited as autosomal dominant trait, but also de novo mutations have been rarely reported in sporadic early-onset dementia cases. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Despite the presence of abundant tau aggregates in multiple regions in all CTE brains, only faint or no [18F]-AV-1451 binding signal could be detected by autoradiography. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

While the DLB patients scored well and did not differ from the control and AD groups in terms of functional activity and connectivity during the task conditions, they showed decreased functional connectivity in visuoperceptual regions during the resting state condition, along with a temporal impairment of the default-mode network activity. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

In 2011, a hexanucleotide repeat expansion in the first intron of the C9orf72 gene was identified as the most common genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 5 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: low

Could metformin be therapeutically useful in Huntington's disease?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Reviews in the neurosciences 2020-04-28

Emerging evidence suggest that dimethylbiguanide (metformin), a first-line drug for type 2 diabetes mellitus, could be neuroprotective in a range of brain pathologies, which include neurodegenerative diseases and brain injury. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 2,748 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.

↑ 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 30,180 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 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), 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.

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

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed