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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 1,051–1,075 of 2,174 studies in Risk factors(page 43 of 87)· 28,180 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; 13,658 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.
What “Risk factors” covers
Risk factors — Conditions, exposures and habits linked to a higher or lower chance of dementia, and how strong each link is.
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.
Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevalence has increased in the last century which can be attributed to increased lifespan, but environment is also important. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Atherosclerosis·2024-09-21
Due to increasing lifespan and aging populations globally there has been a steep rise in late-life dementia, which is now the second most common cause of death in high-income countries. 2 key findings →
Some of these were the same already detected in a population without intellectual disabilities (education, occupation, physical activity, leisure, community and social activities); others were found to be specifically relevant for this population: type of schooling, parental educational level, environmental stimulation and living place. 3 key findings →
There were nine inclusion/exclusion criteria that were used in more than half of the late life depression AETs: minimum severity on a symptom severity scale (100.0%), significant suicidal ideation (77.8%), psychotic features during the current episode of depression or history of a psychotic disorder (94.4%), history of bipolar disorder (77.8%), diagnosis of alcohol or drug abuse or dependence (83.3%), presence of a comorbid nondepressive, nonsubstance use Axis I disorder (55.6%), episode duration too short (66.7%), and an insufficient score on a cognitive screen (88.3%) or the presence of a cognitive disorder (55.6%). 3 key findings →
We respond to the commentary by Ballenger et al. While appreciating "our provocative article", they called for "a more rigorous historical approach…". 1 key finding →
Ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is a key environmental risk factor closely associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), although its specific molecular mechanisms remain incompletely elucidated. 4 key findings →
The odds ratio (OR) for Alzheimer's disease was 0.996 with a p-value of 0.443 using the inverse variance weighted algorithm, and the OR associated with the outcome variable of delirium was 0.393 with a p-value of 0.343. 3 key findings →
Air pollution is a critical global issue with extensive implications beyond respiratory health, significantly affecting neurological and psychiatric disorders. 1 key finding →
Here we show that two different PMs derived from exhausts of cars running on EN590 diesel or compressed natural gas (CNG) alter the function of human microglia-like cells in vitro. 5 key findings →
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which are widely present in incompletely combusted air particulate matter <2.5 μm (PM2.5), tobacco and other organic materials, can enter the human body through various routes and are a class of environmental pollutants with neurotoxic effects. 5 key findings →
Environmental pollution exposures, including air, soil, water, light, and noise pollution, are critical issues that may implicate adverse mental health outcomes. 4 key findings →
Our MR analysis identified a notable association between genetically predicted PM2.5 (PM with a diameter of 2.5 μm or less) exposure and an elevated risk of AD (odds ratio, 2.160; 95% confidence interval, 1.481 to 3.149; p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Neurology·2003-07-08
Fifteen cases were identified (14 men). All had clear histories of dream enactment behavior, and 10 had RBD confirmed by polysomnography. 5 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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.