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 10,701–10,725 of 10,985 studies · free to read(page 429 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.
The Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set provides the dominant quality measurement framework for Medicare Advantage and commercial health plans, yet HEDIS lacks validated geriatric-specific quality indicators, equitable measurement standards for diverse older adult populations, and governance controls calibrated to the high-stakes Star Ratings financial incentive context. 5 key findings →
The law has safeguards intended to ensure that patients are acting autonomously, including a 15-day waiting period between two requests, the requirement that patients meet privately with their physicians to confirm they are acting on their own, and the requirement that patients sign a form within 48 hours of taking the aid-in-dying drug to indicate that it is their choice. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·BOĞAZİÇİ TIP DERGİSİ·2025-01-01
The components of the MIND diet should be evaluated in relation to the dietary habits and cultural background of the population being studied. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Innovation in Aging·2020-12-01
We investigate and find strong evidence that cross-state differences in gender inequality are significantly associated with the gender gap in cognition. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Revista Contemporânea·2025-12-19
A Doença de Alzheimer (DA) constitui um dos maiores desafios de saúde pública devido ao seu impacto crescente na população idosa, especialmente em razão do aumento da expectativa de vida. 5 key findings →
One of the biggest health issues of the twenty-first century is Alzheimer's disease (AD), which is the most prevalent cause of dementia. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Neurología·2026-05-23
Resumen Introducción La vía amiloidogénica de procesamiento de la proteína precursora del amiloide es bien conocida a nivel de patogenia y terapéutica en la enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA), mientras que la vía no-amiloidogénica ha sido menos estudiada. 5 key findings →
A Doença de Alzheimer (DA) é uma enfermidade neurodegenerativa progressiva e a principal causa de demência em idosos, representando cerca de 60 a 70% dos casos. 5 key findings →
A Doença de Alzheimer (DA) é uma patologia neurodegenerativa de caráter progressivo, marcada pela deterioração gradual das funções cognitivas e motoras do indivíduo, com o consequente comprometimento da memória, da linguagem e do comportamento. 5 key findings →
El desarrollo de biomarcadores plasmáticos ha revolucionado el diagnóstico biológico de la enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA), al permitir una detección más temprana y menos invasiva de los procesos neuropatológicos subyacentes. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 27 out of 100.·Polo del Conocimiento·2025-12-01
La presente revisión bibliográfica analiza el papel de la genética clínica en el diagnóstico y pronóstico de la enfermedad de Alzheimer, con un énfasis especial en el contexto ecuatoriano. 5 key findings →
Introducción: la enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA) se define como un trastorno neurodegenerativo caracterizado por acumulación de placas beta amiloide a nivel cerebral, lo cual ocasiona alteraciones histopatológicas y se manifiesta, principalmente, en el deterioro cognitivo (DC).Objetivo: evaluar el efecto de lecanemab sobre el DC en pacientes con EA.Material y métodos: metaanálisis de artículos originales que evaluaron el DC durante los periodos de intervención con placebo y lecanemab. 1 key finding →
Met de registratie van lecanemab in april 2025 en donanemab in september 2025 komt slechts voor een klein deel van de patiënten in het beginstadium van de ziekte van Alzheimer een mogelijke therapie binnen bereik. 2 key findings →
A Doença de Alzheimer (DA) é uma condição neurodegenerativa caracterizada pela formação de placas de β-amiloide (Aβ) e emaranhados neurofibrilares no cérebro, resultando em um declínio cognitivo progressivo. 5 key findings →
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 →
RESUMO A Doença de Alzheimer (DA) é uma condição progressiva caracterizada pelo acúmulo de placas de beta-amiloide e emaranhados neurofibrilares de proteína tau, resultando em perda sináptica e morte neuronal. 5 key findings →
However, postmortem investigations indicate that the AD-typical progressive amnestic syndrome may also result from predominantly limbic non-AD neuropathology such as TDP-43 proteinopathy and argyrophilic grain disease. 3 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 →
La aprobación de lecanemab y donanemab para el tratamiento de la enfermedad de Alzheimer temprana plantea nuevos desafíos para la neurología vascular, principalmente por la aparición de anomalías en las imágenes relacionadas con el amiloide (ARIA). 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 →
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.