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 4,976–5,000 of 10,985 studies · free to read(page 200 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2014-09-01
Being overweight or obese, as measured with body-mass index or central adiposity (waist circumference), and the trajectory of body-mass index over the life course have been associated with brain atrophy, white matter changes, disturbances of blood-brain barrier integrity, and risk of all-cause late-onset dementia and Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration with TDP-43 inclusions (FTLD-TDP) is a fatal neurodegenerative disease with no available treatments. 4 key findings →
Neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) are characterized by selective dysfunction and loss of neurons associated with pathologically altered proteins that deposit in the human brain but also in peripheral organs. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2009-10-15
Basophilic Inclusion Body Disease (BIBD) is a tau-negative form of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), characterized by neuronal cytoplasmic inclusions (NCI) that are visible on hematoxylin and eosin stain (HE), contain RNA, and are inconsistently ubiquitin-immunoreactive (ir). 4 key findings →
The presence of tangles of abnormally phosphorylated tau is a characteristic of Alzheimer's disease (AD), and the loss of synapses correlates with the degree of dementia. 4 key findings →
There is increasing appreciation that non-neuronal cells contribute to the initiation, progression and pathology of diverse neurodegenerative disorders. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Inflammopharmacology·2021-11-23
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major contributor of dementia leading to the degeneration of neurons in the brain with major symptoms like loss of memory and learning. 4 key findings →
Microglial-mediated neuroinflammation plays an important role in vascular dementia, and modulating neuroinflammation has emerged as a promising treatment target. 4 key findings →
Dysfunction of immune and vascular systems has been implicated in aging and Alzheimer disease; however, their interrelatedness remains poorly understood. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer disease (AD) is associated with an increase in the brain of the 18-kDa translocator protein (TSPO), which is overexpressed in activated microglia and reactive astrocytes. 4 key findings →
Dysbiosis of intestinal microbiota in the elderly can cause a leaky gut, which may result in silent systemic inflammation and promote neuroinflammation - a relevant pathomechanism in the early course of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Stem cell reports·2019-09-12
Here we elucidate the effect of Alzheimer disease (AD)-predisposing genetic backgrounds, APOE4, PSEN1ΔE9, and APPswe, on functionality of human microglia-like cells (iMGLs). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Theranostics·2020-02-03
Mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress occur in vascular dementia (VaD), but the specific molecular mechanism regulating these events remains unclear. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.·Age and Ageing·2023-03-01
of 74,486 decedents (60.5% women; mean age 87.1 years (standard deviation: 7.1)), 82.6% had at least one ED visit in their last year of life. 3 key findings →
From both commercial and Medicare Advantage perspectives, mirabegron was the most clinically effective treatment, while oxybutynin was the least expensive. 4 key findings →
Patients with CLTI undergoing peripheral vascular intervention from 2017 to 2018 were derived from the Medicare-linked VQI (Vascular Quality Initiative) registry. 5 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.