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
28,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 3,326–3,350 of 3,493 studies · tagged Treatments(page 134 of 140)· 28,980 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; 14,457 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.
La Agencia Europea de Medicamentos (EMA), tras realizar su comité CHMP una nueva evaluación de su dictamen inicial negativo en julio 2024, ha recomendado que se otorgue una autorización de comercialización limitada a pacientes de Alzheimer, que tienen una o ninguna copia de ApoE4, una determinada forma del gen de la proteína apolipoproteína E. Esta población tiene menos probabilidades de experimentar anomalías de imagen relacionadas con el amiloide (ARIA), una reacción adversa grave conocida, que implica edema (hinchazón) y posibles hemorragias cerebrales. 2 key findings →
This article tells us how modern biotechnology and AI are redefining Alzheimer’s disease through early detection, advanced biomarkers, and innovative treatments like lecanemab. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease and the most common cause of dementia in the world, which has a gradual deterioration of memory, thinking and autonomy. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer disease (AD) is the neurodegenerative condition that occurs in the elderly population above 65 years old and is the major cause of dementia. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease is a multifactorial neurodegenerative disorder characterized by amyloid- β aggregation, oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, tau hyperphosphorylation, and cholinergic dysfunction. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Probecell Science·2026-01-11
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder involving the amyloid-β plaque deposition, tau pathology, synaptic dysfunction, and impairment in cognition. 3 key findings →
Progressive neurodegeneration, which causes memory loss, cognitive decline, and functional impairment is known as Alzheimer's disease, the most common type of dementia, first identified by Alois Alzheimer in 1907. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·ChemistrySelect·2026-07-01
These findings support the use of triazole scaffolds as a unique and versatile framework for developing multifunctional anti‐Alzheimer agents with perceived disease‐modifying activity. 2 key findings →
Agents currently in use against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, including the prospects of a vaccine, have focused primarily on destroying or disabling the virus. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 26 out of 100.·Innovation in Aging·2020-12-01
Anticholinergic medications (ACh) are frequently prescribed to older adults despite being associated with impaired physical functioning. 2 key findings →
La enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA) es la demencia neurodgenerativa más prevalente a nivel mundial, en los últimos años se ha resaltado su relación con los trastornos del sueño y la desregulación de la melatonina. 5 key findings →
For persons with early-stage sympathetic Alzheimer's disease (AD), including those with mild cognitive impairment and mild congitive dementia stages of the disease with confirmed amyloid pathology, KISUNLA (donanemab-azbt) is a disease-modifying treatment. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 26 out of 100.·EvidenzUpdate·2025-10-09
Nößler: Selten hat die Neuanführung eines Arzneimittels so ein großes Medienecho ausgelöst wie jüngst der Markteintritt von Lecanemab und jetzt die Zulassung von Donanemab. 5 key findings →
Lecanemab ist eine Anti-Amyloid-Antikörper-Therapie, die entwickelt wurde, um toxische Amyloid-Plaques zu beseitigen und das Fortschreiten der Alzheimer-Krankheit zu verlangsamen. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 26 out of 100.·Geriatrie up2date·2025-10-01
All articles of this category (opens in new window) Die zerebrale Amyloidangiopathie (CAA) ist eine Erkrankung, bei der sich beta-Amyloid in den Gefäßwänden des Gehirns ablagert. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 26 out of 100.·BioSCIENCE·2025-10-15
Introdução: A doença de Alzheimer (DA) é uma condição neurodegenerativa progressiva, caracterizada pelo acúmulo de placas de β-amiloide e emaranhados neurofibrilares. 5 key findings →
9 of the 3,475 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 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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%),
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.
1,038 records (3.6% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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.