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

Showing 26–50 of 56 studies in Treatments published 2006 (page 2 of 3) · 31,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 56 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “Treatments” covers

Treatments — Drug and non-drug treatment research — what was tested, in whom, and what changed — plus the approvals and coverage decisions that followed.

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.

These responder analyses may assist clinicians in evaluating the impact of memantine in a relevant clinical scenario, i.e., in patients with AD previously stabilized on a cholinesterase inhibitor. 3 key findings →

Participants: 404 Evidence: high

The authors believe these design elements are important features to be included in trials of depression and other neuropsychiatric disturbances in Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

Cognitive functioning, mood, and health-related QOL were significantly improved following a 24-week course of the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor donepezil. 5 key findings →

Design: open-label trial Participants: 35 Evidence: low

These post-hoc analyses support the beneficial effects of memantine on cognition observed in a previously reported clinical trial. 4 key findings →

Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: high

The CSDD, and particularly its mood subscale, appears to be more sensitive than the HDRS, it's subscales or the NPI-M, for comparing drug to placebo in treating major depression in AD patients. 3 key findings →

Evidence: high

Patients wore CPAP for 4.8 hours per night. 2 key findings →

Participants: 30 Evidence: high

As a safe and effective medicine, akatinol memantine, which has a similar effect as donepezil for AD, can remarkably improve the cognition, behavior, and mood of AD patients. 1 key finding →

Participants: 50 Evidence: low

Screening tools are available for depression and dementia in patients with PD, but more specific validated tools are needed. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

There are many who feel that the achievement of a disease-modifying (DM) designation for a drug is an important goal in Alzheimer disease (AD) therapeutics. 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

Donepezil markedly potentiates memantine neurotoxicity in the adult rat brain

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2006-11-16

The NMDA antagonist, memantine (Namenda), and the cholinesterase inhibitor, donepezil (Aricept), are currently being used widely, either individually or in combination, for treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

In the current protocol, we describe the Congo red staining method and a method for separately quantifying vascular and parenchymal amyloid deposits in brain tissue sections. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Experiments with amyloid-beta (Abeta)-42-immunized transgenic mouse models of Alzheimer's disease have revealed amyloid plaque disruption and apparent cognitive function recovery. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Role of melatonin in Alzheimer-like neurodegeneration

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Acta pharmacologica Sinica 2006-01-01

Alzheimer disease (AD), an age-related neurodegenerative disorder with progressive loss of memory and deterioration of comprehensive cognition, is characterized by extracellular senile plaques of aggregated beta-amyloid (Abeta), and intracellular neurofibrillary tangles that contain hyperphosphorylated tau protein. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Paradigm shift in neuroprotection by NMDA receptor blockade: memantine and beyond

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Nature reviews. Drug discovery 2006-02-01

Neuroprotective drugs tested in clinical trials, particularly those that block N-methyl-D-aspartate-sensitive glutamate receptors (NMDARs), have failed miserably in large part because of intolerable side effects. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

While the presence of naturally occurring antibodies (Abs) against amyloid-beta in AD patients and healthy subjects have been repeatedly reported, no data on the presence of naturally occurring Abs against tau protein, in its unphosphorylated as well as its pathologically phosphorylated state, has been reported so far. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Lead compounds directed to the 5' leader of the Amyloid Precursor Protein transcript (i.e., paroxetine (SSRI), N-acetyl cysteine (antioxidant), and erythromycin (macrolide antibiotic)) were employed in a pilot study to evaluate their anti-amyloid efficacy in the TgCRND8 transgenic mouse model for Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Neurogenesis in the subgranular zone of the hippocampal dentate gyrus and olfactory bulbs continues into adulthood and has been implicated in the cognitive function of the adult brain. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

↑ 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
  • Randomized / 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
  • Multicenter 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 31,780 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 31,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66% of the library) and OpenAlex (16%), 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.

1,052 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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    Where this research is being discussed: events