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 451–475 of 1,380 studies in Disease mechanisms(page 19 of 56)· 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.
What “Disease mechanisms” covers
Disease mechanisms — Cell- and molecule-level research into what actually goes wrong in Alzheimer's and related diseases.
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.
One of the most important scientific discoveries of recent years was the disclosure that the intestinal microflora takes part in bidirectional communication between the gut and the brain. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Nature·1988-10-01
The clinical manifestations of AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) often include neuropsychiatric and neurological deficits, including early memory loss and progressive dementia. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2017-03-20
Almost half the cells and 1% of the unique genes found in our bodies are human, the rest are from microbes, predominantly bacteria, archaea, fungi, and viruses. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Cells·2020-08-17
The intestinal barrier is essential in human health and constitutes the interface between the outside and the internal milieu of the body. 1 key finding →
Although the potential contribution of the human gastrointestinal (GI) tract microbiome to human health, aging, and disease is becoming increasingly acknowledged, the molecular mechanics and signaling pathways of just how this is accomplished is not well-understood. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2017-10-18
It has previously been shown that the consumption of probiotics may have beneficial effects not only on peripheral tissues but also on the central nervous system and behavior via the microbiota-gut-brain axis, raising the possibility that treatment with probiotics could be an effective therapeutic strategy for managing neurodegenerative disorders. 5 key findings →
Inflammation is a protective reaction activated in response to detrimental stimuli, such as dead cells, irritants or pathogens, by the evolutionarily conserved immune system and is regulated by the host. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2017-09-05
Recent evidence suggests the commensal microbiome regulates host immunity and influences brain function; findings that have ramifications for neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2018-04-27
Neurovascular integrity, including cerebral blood flow (CBF) and blood-brain barrier (BBB) function, plays a major role in determining cognitive capability. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2018-05-24
Neurological diseases, such as Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and multiple sclerosis, are often associated with functional gastrointestinal disorders. 2 key findings →
The aggregation of amyloid-β peptide (Aβ) has been linked to the formation of neuritic plaques, which are pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·1995-07-01
The brains of 46 control subjects and 21 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients were studied to determine whether there are age-related or AD-related changes in the vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP) neuron population of the human suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Nutrients·2019-09-23
Metabolic endotoxemia is a condition in which blood lipopolysaccharide (LPS) levels are elevated, regardless of the presence of obvious infection. 5 key findings →
Increasing evidence suggests that gut dysbiosis plays vital roles in a variety of gut-brain disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
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.