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.

Physical exercise is a cornerstone in the management of many neurodegenerative disorders, such as Parkinson's disease, dementia, and stroke. 1 key finding →

Design: narrative review Evidence: low

A sequential light and electron microscopic study of cerebral cortex was performed in a rat model of portal-systemic encephalopathy produced by creating a portacaval shunt and followed by ammoniate resin feedings. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The role of inflammation in neurological disorders is increasingly recognised. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Latent reservoirs of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) present significant challenges for eradicating HIV from infected persons, particularly reservoirs in the brain established during acute infection. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

ADF/Cofilin-actin rods in neurodegenerative diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Current Alzheimer research 2010-05-01

Dephosphorylation (activation) of cofilin, an actin binding protein, is stimulated by initiators of neuronal dysfunction and degeneration including oxidative stress, excitotoxic glutamate, ischemia, and soluble forms of beta-amyloid peptide (Abeta). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The clinical manifestations that occur after traumatic brain injury (TBI) include a wide range of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral deficits. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Transporters in the brain endothelial barrier

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Current medicinal chemistry 2010-01-01

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) not only impedes the influx of intravascular substances from blood to brain, but also promotes transport of substances from blood to brain or from brain to blood through several transport systems such as carrier-mediated transport, active efflux transport, and receptor-mediated transport systems. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Delirium is a profound, acute confusional state that leads to long-term cognitive decline. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neuroinflammation in delirium: a postmortem case-control study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Rejuvenation research 2011-10-06

These preliminary study results show an association between human brain activity of microglia, astrocytes, and IL-6 and delirium in elderly patients and add to the accumulating evidence that inflammatory mechanisms are involved in delirium. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

A large percentage of patients subjected to general anesthesia at 65 years and older exhibit postoperative delirium (POD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Hypertension, a powerful risk factor for stroke and dementia, has damaging effects on the brain and its vessels. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Oxidative stress in brain aging. Implications for therapeutics of neurodegenerative diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2002-09-01

Age has a powerful effect on enhanced susceptibility to neurodegenerative diseases, including susceptibility to stroke and cognitive impairment (CI) even in optimally healthy individuals. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Is breakdown of the blood-brain barrier responsible for lacunar stroke, leukoaraiosis, and dementia?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Stroke 2003-02-27

Proof that blood-brain barrier failure is key to these conditions could provide a target for new treatments to reduce the effects of vascular disease on the brain and prevent cognitive decline and dementia. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The review focuses on the clinical diagnostic utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

From across this tag

10 of the 902 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 27,380 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.

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

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed