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 101–125 of 1,346 studies (page 5 of 54)· 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2026-04-01
Female individuals had higher plaque burden than male individuals (unadjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.67-2.29; P Conclusions and relevance The findings indicate that female sex, APOEε4, and both race and African ancestry were jointly associated with amyloid in this study population. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2015-05-01
Overall, memory worsened from age 30 years through the 90s. The HVa worsened gradually from age 30 years to the mid-60s and more steeply beyond that age. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·JAMA network open·2018-10-05
Median (interquartile range) CRP levels increased with mean (SD) age (43.3 [9.6] years, 0.95 mg/L [0.40-2.35 mg/L] vs 59.1 [9.6] years, 2.04 mg/L [0.93-4.75 mg/L] vs 61.6 [9.5] years, 2.21 mg/L [1.05-5.12 mg/L]; P Conclusions and relevance In this study, peripheral chronic low-grade inflammation in participants with ApoE4 was associated with shortened latency for onset of AD. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Circulation·2015-04-10
By conditioning on the genetic association with the cardiovascular phenotypes, we identify novel AD susceptibility loci, including 2 genome-wide significant variants conferring increased risk for AD. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Neurology·2015-12-07
More research is needed to elucidate the neural mechanisms underlying these regional associations, which may involve motor and sensorimotor circuits hitherto largely neglected in the pathophysiology of AD. 1 key finding →
Partial volume corrected and uncorrected results were generally in agreement; however, the correlation between (11)C-PBR28 and (11)C-Pittsburgh Compound B binding was seen only after partial volume correction. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Neurology·2012-12-12
At baseline measurements, amyloid burden does not distinguish between cognitively impaired and unimpaired subjects with PD without dementia, but our data suggest that amyloid contributes to cognitive, but not motor, decline over time. 3 key findings →
Strikingly gene-expression, network-based analysis and cell type deconvolution approaches revealed a consistent immune signature in the brain and blood of female AD patients that was absent in males. 5 key findings →
This study provides initial data that demonstrate elevated antibodies to periodontal disease bacteria in subjects years before cognitive impairment and suggests that periodontal disease could potentially contribute to the risk of AD onset/progression. 5 key findings →
Cross-sectional functional magnetic resonance imaging studies using a memory task in patients with mild cognitive impairment have produced discordant results, with some studies reporting increased hippocampal activity--consistent with findings in genetic at-risk populations--and other studies reporting decreased hippocampal activity, relative to normal controls. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Nature medicine·2002-10-15
To characterize antibodies produced in humans in response to Abeta42 vaccination, we carried out immunohistochemical examinations of the brains of both transgenic mice and human patients with beta-amyloid pathology. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·PloS one·2011-02-24
Recent GWAS studies focused on uncovering novel genetic loci related to AD have revealed associations with variants near CLU, CR1, PICALM and BIN1. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2020-03-01
Intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) is an important cause of stroke and has also been recently identified as an important risk factor for all-cause dementia, but the mechanism of its association with cognitive performance is not fully understood. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Nature aging·2021-05-14
The plasma proteomic changes that precede the onset of dementia could yield insights into disease biology and highlight new biomarkers and avenues for intervention. 4 key findings →
Although it is clear that astrocytes and microglia cluster around dense-core amyloid plaques in Alzheimer disease (AD), whether they are primarily attracted to amyloid deposits or are just reacting to plaque-associated neuritic damage remains elusive. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Science·1993-08-13
The apolipoprotein E type 4 allele (APOE-epsilon 4) is genetically associated with the common late onset familial and sporadic forms of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Nature·1991-02-21
To avoid the problems that heterogeneity poses for genetic analysis, the researchers examined the cosegregation of Alzheimer's disease and markers along the long arm of chromosome 21 in a single family. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2024-07-26
A summary measure of γ-secretase activity (γ-secretase composite [GSC]) was calculated for each variant and compared with clinical history-derived AAO using correlation analyses. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.·Nature Medicine·2008-06-22
Researchers extracted soluble amyloid-beta protein oligomers directly from the cerebral cortex of subjects with Alzheimer's disease to study their impact. 3 key findings →
10 of the 1,344 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 27,380 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.