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 201–225 of 1,163 studies (page 9 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.
Standardized automated analysis of (18)F-FDG PET scans may provide an objective and sensitive support to the clinical diagnosis in early dementia. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2000-04-01
We used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements to determine whether persons in the prodromal phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD) could be accurately identified before they developed clinically diagnosed dementia. 1 key finding →
Progressive CMRglc reductions on FDG-PET occur years in advance of clinical DAT symptoms in patients with pathologically verified disease. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Neurology·2004-02-01
These data support the use of rates of change from serial MRI studies in addition to standard clinical/psychometric measures as surrogate markers of disease progression in AD. 1 key finding →
We compared the predictive value of cerebral perfusion as measured by arterial-spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging (ASL-MRI) with MRI-derived hippocampal volume for determining future cognitive and functional decline and subsequent conversion from mild cognitive impairment to dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Neurology·2013-09-18
Atrophy in FAD is observed early, both in areas commonly associated with sporadic Alzheimer disease and also in the putamen and thalamus, 2 regions associated with early amyloid deposition in FAD mutation carriers. 4 key findings →
The aim of this study was to assess the agreement between data on cerebral amyloidosis, derived using Pittsburgh compound B positron emission tomography and (i) multi-laboratory INNOTEST enzyme linked immunosorbent assay derived cerebrospinal fluid concentrations of amyloid-β42; (ii) centrally measured cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β42 using a Meso Scale Discovery enzyme linked immunosorbent assay; and (iii) cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β42 centrally measured using an antibody-independent mass spectrometry-based reference method. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2003-02-01
To accurately predict the development of Alzheimer's disease (AD) at its predementia stage would be a major breakthrough from both therapeutic and research standpoints. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2006-10-01
Mutation carriers had significantly increased hippocampal and whole-brain atrophy rates compared with controls and these differences increased with time. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Clinical epigenetics·2020-06-15
Our work shows that peripheral differential methylation between age-matched subjects with AD relative to healthy controls will provide opportunities to further investigate and validate differential methylation as a surrogate of disease. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Neurology·2024-02-05
Alzheimer disease (AD) is primarily associated with accumulations of amyloid plaques and tau tangles in gray matter, however, it is now acknowledged that neuroinflammation, particularly in white matter (WM), significantly contributes to the development and progression of AD. 4 key findings →
Models of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology posit that amyloidosis [A] precedes and accelerates tau pathology [T] that leads to neurodegeneration [N]. 4 key findings →
Measures are needed that identify persons that will develop Alzheimer's disease in order to target them for preventative interventions. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Bioelectromagnetics·2025-10-31
Meta-analyses of epidemiological studies have suggested that Alzheimer's disease (AD) may be linked with exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields (MF). 4 key findings →
Design:meta-analysisParticipants: 155,562Evidence: high
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2013-12-01
CSF and amyloid PET measurements of Aβ were consistent in the majority of subjects in the cross-sectional and longitudinal populations. 2 key findings →
In the CU, using combined plasma Aβ42/40 and p-tau217 cut-offs for eligibility yielded the lowest sample size estimates for a comprehensive multidomain cognitive composite score, whereas sample sizes were higher for all other inclusion criteria based on single biomarkers. 5 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.