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
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 526–550 of 1,163 studies (page 22 of 47)· 27,780 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; 13,259 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 amyloid β (Aβ) peptide, which is abundantly found in the brains of patients suffering from Alzheimer disease, is central in the pathogenesis of this disease. 4 key findings →
Stimulation of muscarinic m1 or m3 receptors can, by generating diacylglycerol and activating protein kinase C, accelerate the breakdown of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) to form soluble, nonamyloidogenic derivatives (APPs), as previously shown. 4 key findings →
Disrupted cholesterol homeostasis has been reported in Alzheimer disease and is thought to contribute to disease progression by promoting amyloid β (Aβ) accumulation. 4 key findings →
Ectopic cell cycle events (CCEs) mark vulnerable neuronal populations in human Alzheimer disease (AD) and are observed early in disease progression. 4 key findings →
Apolipoprotein (apo) E4 is the major genetic risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD) and likely contributes to neuropathology through various pathways. 4 key findings →
Two different macrophage populations contribute to CNS neuroinflammation: CNS-resident microglia and CNS-infiltrating peripheral macrophages. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100.·Glia·2019-01-25
Type I interferons (IFN-I) are the principal antiviral molecules of the innate immune system and can be made by most cell types, including central nervous system cells. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with the accumulation of β-amyloid (Aβ) as senile plaques in the brain, thus leading to neurodegeneration and cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Transactivation-responsive DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) is a component of pathological inclusions in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and several forms of sporadic and familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration. 4 key findings →
Recent findings suggest that hypercholesterolemia may contribute to the onset of Alzheimer's disease-like dementia but the underlying mechanisms remain unknown. 4 key findings →
Microglia constitute the primary resident immune surveillance cell in the brain and are thought to play a significant role in the pathogenesis of several neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease and HIV-associated dementia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100.·Gene·2005-06-01
We presently describe the full-length cloning and functional characterization of an HIV-1-inducible gene, astrocyte elevated gene (AEG)-1. 4 key findings →
The expression of the purinergic receptor subtype P2X(7)R, a nonselective cationic channel activated by high levels of adenosine triphosphate (ATP), has been studied in adult microglia obtained from Alzheimer disease (AD) and nondemented (ND) brains, in fetal human microglia exposed to Abeta(1-42) peptide and in vivo in Abeta(1-42)-injected rat hippocampus. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100.·Journal of virology·2001-11-01
The viral determinants that underlie human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) neurotropism are unknown, due in part to limited studies on viruses isolated from brain. 4 key findings →
Oxidative stress induced by inhibition of glutathione (GSH) biosynthesis with D,L-buthionine-S,R-sulfoximine (BSO) causes human microglia, human astrocytes, THP-1 cells, and U373 cells to secrete materials toxic to human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells and stimulates them to release TNF-alpha, IL-6, and nitrite ions. 4 key findings →
A recent randomized trial demonstrated clear cerebrospinal-fluid DHA target engagement without detectable improvement in cognition or brain volume over 24 months. 5 key findings →
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are membrane-enclosed nanoparticles released by most cell types, and from multiple sub-cellular compartments. 1 key finding →
10 of the 1,159 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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.
Show only studies that are free to read
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%),
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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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.