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.

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a brief instrument developed for the screening of milder forms of cognitive impairment, having surpassed the well-known limitations of the MMSE. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

We aimed to determine whether genetically determined CRP was associated with hundreds of human phenotypes to guide anti-inflammatory interventions. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The Long Non-Coding RNAs in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Novel Mechanisms of Pathogenesis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Current Alzheimer research 2016-01-01

Long-non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), RNA molecules longer than 200 nucleotides, have been involved in several biological processes and in a growing number of diseases, controlling gene transcription, pre-mRNA processing, the transport of mature mRNAs to specific cellular compartments, the regulation of mRNA stability, protein translation and turnover. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Microglia are endogenous brain macrophages that show distinct phenotypes such as expression of myeloid antigens, ramified morphology, and presence within the neural parenchyma. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia among the elderly, characterized by amyloid plaques, neurofibrillary tangles, and neuroinflammation in the brain, as well as impaired cognitive behaviors. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

In most neurodegenerative disorders, including multiple sclerosis, Parkinson disease, and Alzheimer disease, a massive neuronal cell death occurs as a consequence of an uncontrolled inflammatory response, where activated astrocytes and microglia and their cytotoxic agents play a crucial pathological role. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dementia decedents were more likely to die at home and other places and less likely to die at institutional settings over the study period. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Ninety-five percent of the patients with dementia were reported to have at least one agitated behavior; 75% had at least one moderately disruptive behavior. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

For 2018 and 2019, 3.5% and 5.4% received ACP visits, and 0.4% and 0.5% received CAACPS visits, similar to use reported elsewhere. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Effects of Changes in Multiple Chronic Conditions on Medical Costs among Older Adults in South Korea

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Healthcare 2022-04-15

This study aims to analyze the relationship between cognitive function and out-of-pocket cost of the state change of multiple chronic conditions in individuals aged 60 or older. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Impact of diagnosis timing on AD cost and healthcare utilization

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2023-12-01

Early-diagnosed patients (N = 421) have a lower utilization rate of inpatient skilled nursing facility, nursing home and hospitalization than late-diagnosed patients (N = 2817) after being diagnosed with AD. 5 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 421 Evidence: moderate

A growing body of literature has examined the impact of neighborhood characteristics on Alzheimer’s disease (AD) dementia, yet the spatial variability and relative importance of the most influential factors remain underexplored. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The overall 1-year recurrent stroke rate was 9.4% among 895,916 ischemic stroke patients (mean age: 78 years; 56.6% women; 86.6% White, 9.7% Black and 1.2% Latino/Hispanic). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Area Deprivation Index and Gut-Brain Axis in Cirrhosis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Clinical and Translational Gastroenterology 2022-05-10

A total of 321 people with cirrhosis (60 years, 78% men, 75% non-Hispanic White, 24% non-Hispanic African American, 4% Hispanic) were included. 45% had prior HE and 56% MHE. 5 key findings →

Participants: 321 Evidence: low

Stark differences across SES in service use by people with dementia may indicate different health needs and/or allude to pervasive health inequities. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

State case fatality ranged from 3.32% in North Carolina to 9.26% in Connecticut, but for ALs in these states it was 12.89% and 31.59%, respectively. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

This study aimed to test the hypothesis that multi-level factors across the five Health Ecological Model (HEM) layers are independently associated with SCD among hypertensive patients in rural China, and to identify specific associated factors within each layer. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

Regression analyses showed that with the inclusion of socioenvironmental factors, the model was significant (p < .001), and sociodemographic (ethnic/race) group differences were not significant (p = .118). 4 key findings →

Participants: 72 Evidence: low

Typical normative models appear appropriate for remote self‐administered measures and are sensitive to cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →

Participants: 167 Evidence: low

↑ 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.

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 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.

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

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed