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 6,376–6,400 of 10,985 studies · free to read(page 256 of 440)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
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.
Providing peer-support groups using telehealth may have the potential to develop self-sustaining peer networks for isolated caregivers of people with dementia. 1 key finding →
The complex molecular mechanism and pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease (AD) limits the development of effective therapeutics or prevention strategies. 5 key findings →
The poor generalizability of clinical research data due to the enrollment of highly educated, non-Latinx White participants hampers the development of therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a debilitating neurodegenerative disorder with a global impact, yet its pathogenesis remains poorly understood. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Chest·2011-06-01
To record sleep, actigraph devices are worn on the wrist and record movements that can be used to estimate sleep parameters with specialized algorithms in computer software programs. 1 key finding →
In the past, the role of physical activity as a life-style modulating factor has been considered as that of a tool to balance energy intake. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia among the elderly and is characterized by progressive loss of memory and cognition. 3 key findings →
Recent literature has pointed to the existence of inflammasome-mediated inflammatory pathways in central nervous system (CNS) disorders and associated changes in behavior. 2 key findings →
Genetic variations in promoter sequences that alter gene expression play a prominent role in increasing susceptibility to complex diseases. 1 key finding →
Amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides, starting with pyroglutamate at the third residue (pyroGlu-3 Aβ), are a major species deposited in the brain of Alzheimer disease (AD) patients. 1 key finding →
Down syndrome (DS) is the most common genetic cause of intellectual disability in children, and the number of adults with DS reaching old age is increasing. 4 key findings →
These findings demonstrate that chronic InRapa administration is able to exert a neuroprotective effect on Ts65Dn hippocampus by reducing AD pathological hallmarks and by restoring protein homeostasis, thus ultimately resulting in improved cognition. 5 key findings →
On November 8-9, 2007, a meeting entitled "Setting a Public Health Research Agenda for Down Syndrome" was held to review current knowledge, identify gaps, and develop priorities for future public health research related to Down syndrome. 5 key findings →
Adults with Down syndrome (DS) have an exceptionally high prevalence of Alzheimer disease (AD), with an earlier age of onset compared with the neurotypical population. 4 key findings →
This study provided a preliminary examination of indices of obstructive sleep apsnea (OSA) and sleep disruptions in adults with Down syndrome (DS), and their associations with Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology and symptomatology. 3 key findings →
There is a need for early, objective markers of Alzheimer's disease (AD)-related synapse dysfunction in adults with Down syndrome (DS). 1 key finding →
Demonstrated utility of the mCRT warrants further investigation into comparisons between the A and B versions, free versus cued recall and changes in performance over time to better understand sensitivity for tracking memory decline over time based on age and AD clinical status. 5 key findings →
In response to oxidative stress, the nuclear factor E2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) transcription factor translocates from the cytoplasm into the nucleus and transactivates expression of genes with antioxidant activity. 2 key findings →
The microtubule-associated protein tau is a natively unfolded protein in solution, yet it is able to polymerize into the ordered paired helical filaments (PHF) of Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
TDP-43 is a highly conserved and ubiquitously expressed member of the heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein (hnRNP) family of proteins. 2 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.