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
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 4,476–4,500 of 10,985 studies · free to read(page 180 of 440)· 27,380 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; 12,859 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.
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) are neurodegenerative diseases that show considerable clinical and pathologic overlap, with no effective treatments available. 1 key finding →
Accumulation of the synaptic protein alpha-synuclein (alpha-syn) is a hallmark of Parkinson's disease (PD) and Lewy body disease (LBD), a heterogeneous group of disorders with dementia and parkinsonism, where Alzheimer's disease and PD interact. 2 key findings →
Neuronal cytoplasmic and intranuclear aggregates of RNA-binding protein TDP-43 are a hallmark feature of neurodegenerative diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). 2 key findings →
It is widely accepted that the familial Parkinson's disease (PD)-linked gene product, parkin, functions as a ubiquitin ligase involved in protein turnover via the ubiquitin-proteasome system. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Neuron·2014-12-01
Expanded GGGGCC (G4C2) nucleotide repeats within the C9ORF72 gene are the most common genetic mutation associated with both amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 1 key finding →
The accumulation of Tau into aggregates is associated with key pathological events in frontotemporal lobe degeneration (FTD-Tau) and Alzheimer disease (AD). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·PLoS biology·2011-04-26
TDP-43 and FUS are RNA-binding proteins that form cytoplasmic inclusions in some forms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). 1 key finding →
Intronic expansion of a hexanucleotide GGGGCC repeat in the chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 (C9ORF72) gene is the major cause of familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia. 1 key finding →
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) are characterized by cytoplasmic protein aggregates in the brain and spinal cord that include TAR-DNA binding protein 43 (TDP-43). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Autophagy·2020-02-12
Organelle-specific autophagy is one of the major subtypes of autophagy, selectively targeting different organelles for quality control. 5 key findings →
Since the identification of tau as the main component of neurofibrillary tangles in Alzheimer's disease and related tauopathies, and the discovery that mutations in the tau gene cause frontotemporal dementia, much effort has been directed towards determining how the aggregation of tau into fibrillar inclusions causes neuronal death. 1 key finding →
Efficient intercellular transfer of RNAs, proteins, and lipids as protected exosomal cargo has been demonstrated in the CNS, but distinct physiologic and pathologic roles have not been well defined for this pathway. 3 key findings →
Research increasingly suggests that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in older adults, in the absence of objective cognitive dysfunction or depression, may be a harbinger of non-normative cognitive decline and eventual progression to dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2007-11-01
Spatial patterns of brain atrophy in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) were measured via methods of computational neuroanatomy. 3 key findings →
Here, we review progress by the Penn Biomarker Core in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) toward developing a pathological cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma biomarker signature for mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) as well as a biomarker profile that predicts conversion of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and/or normal control subjects to AD. 2 key findings →
Oxidative stress is thought to play a role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and increased oxidative DNA damage has been observed in brain tissue from AD patients. 3 key findings →
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.
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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%),
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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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.