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 626–650 of 1,163 studies (page 26 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.
EEG connectivity analysis via a combination of source/connectivity biomarkers, highly correlating with neuropsychological AD diagnosis, could represent a promising tool in identification of AD patients. 2 key findings →
Gene ontology over-representation and functional gene network analyses indicate an increase in synaptic activity and changes in plasticity during the very early pre-symptomatic stage of the disease. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2007-06-29
Recent research has shown an increased rate of conversion to dementia in subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) compared to controls. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Radiology·2020-05-05
Growing evidence indicates an association between cerebral microhemorrhages (MHs) and amyloid β accumulation in Alzheimer disease (AD), but to the knowledge of the authors the association with tau burden is unknown. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2010-06-11
MRI research examining structural brain atrophy in Alzheimer's disease (AD) generally focuses on medial temporal and cortical structures, but amyloid and tau deposits also accumulate in the caudate. 4 key findings →
We assessed remote memory in 33 patients with dementia of Alzheimer's type (DAT) with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores between 17 and 30, and 30 matched controls using a Famous Faces Test and Famous Names Test designed to assess face recognition, identification and naming, and name recognition and identification, respectively, together with a range of anterograde episodic and semantic memory tests. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2010-03-01
Neuroimaging with iron-sensitive MR sequences [gradient echo T2* and susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI)] identifies small signal voids that are suspected brain microbleeds. 4 key findings →
To ensure diversity, we developed a comprehensive recruitment strategy using a diverse, culturally‐trained staff that includes : • Identifying Dementia Specialists experienced recruiting minorities • Embedding high‐impact community engagement in select regions • Increasing capacity of specialists and PET facilities to engage minorities • Increasing pipeline of referrals to Dementia Specialists • Creating a culturally‐informed awareness campaign Result New IDEAS has enrolled 4,524 participants including 954 (21.1%) Black/African American, and 842 (18.6%) Hispanic/Latinx. 3 key findings →
Thirty-three AD subjects, aged 69.3 ± 8.2 years (mean ± standard deviation), 18 females, and 22 HCs aged 70.5 ± 13.3 years, 15 females, were evaluated. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Scientific Reports·2025-02-17
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a progressive condition of a neurological brain disorder recognized by symptoms such as dementia, memory loss, alterations in behaviour, and impaired reasoning abilities. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a particular form of dementiacharacterized by a steady decline in brain function and cognitive abilities, leading to memory loss, disorientation, and trouble doing daily tasks. 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease staging from structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is challenging when clinically adjacent stages and severe class imbalance are considered simultaneously. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·BMC Medical Imaging·2026-05-11
We identified 8 brain structural features from 192 MRI features that were associated with the risk of MCI progressing to AD, including: left hippocampus, left inferior lateral ventricle, left amygdala, right middle temporal gyrus, left fusiform gyrus, right amygdala, left cortical total volume, and brain parenchyma total volume. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2018-10-01
Ten participants with AD (5 male and 5 female; mean [SD] age, 72.7 [6.3] years; 10 [100%] β-amyloid positive) were compared with 11 participants who were cognitively normal (5 male and 6 female; mean [SD] age, 72.9 [8.7] years; 11 [100%] β-amyloid negative). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2014-09-04
As preclinical Alzheimer's disease becomes a target for therapeutic intervention, the overlap between imaging abnormalities associated with typical ageing and those associated with Alzheimer's disease needs to be recognised. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·PloS one·2011-10-13
The role of structural brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is becoming more and more emphasized in the early diagnostics of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
This evaluation shows an [ 18 F]MK-6240 distribution in concordance with postmortem studies and that simplified quantitative approaches such as the SUVR offer valid estimates of neurofibrillary tangle load 90 min post injection. [ 18 F]MK-6240 is a promising tau tracer with the potential to be applied in the disease diagnosis and assessment of therapeutic interventions. 2 key findings →
Future longitudinal studies examining the association of more severe depressive symptoms and cerebral tau accumulation are needed to substantiate this finding and to guide prevention and treatment in AD. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·EJNMMI research·2018-12-05
[ 18 F]flutemetamol data can now be expressed in Centiloid units, enhancing its utility in clinical and research applications for β-amyloid imaging. 2 key findings →
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.