Get help now — free helplines

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 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call 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) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed 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.

Find studies

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.

In vivo retention of 18F-AV-1451 in corticobasal syndrome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Neurology 2017-07-28

Patients with CBS without typical AD pathology exhibited AV-1451 retention in the motor cortex, corticospinal tract, and basal ganglia contralateral to the affected body side, clearly different from controls and patients with AD dementia or PSP. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Amnestic forms of MCI appear to have demographic, genetic, and MRI findings suggestive of Alzheimer disease pathology, whereas the nonamnestic forms of MCI have findings suggestive of vascular disease. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 153 Evidence: low

High white matter grade (WMG) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a risk factor for dementia, stroke and disability. 5 key findings →

Participants: 3,245 Evidence: low

Higher arterial stiffness and pulsatility were associated with MCI and dementia in white participants. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate

There has been a recent upsurge of reports about applications of pattern-recognition techniques from the field of machine learning to functional MR imaging data as a diagnostic tool for systemic brain disease or psychiatric disorders. 5 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Brain Insulin Resistance at the Crossroads of Metabolic and Cognitive Disorders in Humans

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Physiological reviews 2016-08-03

Ever since the brain was identified as an insulin-sensitive organ, evidence has rapidly accumulated that insulin action in the brain produces multiple behavioral and metabolic effects, influencing eating behavior, peripheral metabolism, and cognition. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Approximately 10% of dementia patients have idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH), an expansion of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-filled brain ventricles. iNPH and Alzheimer's disease (AD) both exhibit sleep disturbances, build-up of brain metabolic wastes and amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques, perivascular reactive astrogliosis, and mislocalization of astrocyte aquaporin-4 (AQP4). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Hypertension is a leading risk factor for dementia, but the mechanisms underlying its damaging effects on the brain are poorly understood. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Rich club disturbances of the human connectome from subjective cognitive decline to Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Theranostics 2018-05-11

We demonstrated that rich club organization was disrupted, with reduced structural connectivity among rich club nodes, in aMCI and d-AD patients but remained stable in SCD patients. 5 key findings →

Participants: 62 Evidence: low

Emotional changes are common in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Participants: 237 Evidence: low

Post-stroke depression, executive dysfunction and functional outcome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. European journal of neurology 2002-05-01

The early diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment has been challenged and executive control function has been suggested to be a rational basis for the diagnosis of vascular dementia. 4 key findings →

Participants: 104 Evidence: moderate

Cigarette smoking is associated with increased risk for myriad health consequences including cognitive decline and dementia, but research on the link between smoking and brain structure is nascent. 4 key findings →

Participants: 19,615 Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia, characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-beta (Aβ) and neurofibrillary tangles. 4 key findings →

Participants: 16 Evidence: low

The cause of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) dementia, which is a frequent late manifestation of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection, is unknown but radiological and pathological studies have implicated alterations in subcortical white matter. 4 key findings →

Participants: 12 Evidence: low

Microglia in neurodegenerative disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Nature reviews. Neurology 2010-03-16

Microglia, the resident macrophages of the CNS, are exquisitely sensitive to brain injury and disease, altering their morphology and phenotype to adopt a so-called activated state in response to pathophysiological brain insults. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

There is increasing appreciation that non-neuronal cells contribute to the initiation, progression and pathology of diverse neurodegenerative disorders. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dysfunction of immune and vascular systems has been implicated in aging and Alzheimer disease; however, their interrelatedness remains poorly understood. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 903 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.

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

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 tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed