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
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 901–925 of 3,166 studies of type cohort or longitudinal study(page 37 of 127)· 27,780 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; 13,259 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.
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.
Among older adults with diabetes, no clear evidence was found that the incidence of dementia differed overall between patients using GLP-1RAs versus DPP4is. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Neurology·2026-05-20
Smoking cessation was associated with a sustained lower dementia risk and slower cognitive decline, comparable to never smokers and those without short-term risk increase. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·JAMA Network Open·2024-07-01
In this cohort and MR study of UK Biobank participants, cataracts were associated with increased risk of dementia, especially vascular dementia, and reduced total brain volumes. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Brain·2025-01-07
Previous studies have shown that limbic-predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy neuropathologic change (LATE-NC) increases with age, but there have been only a few studies, which have investigated this entity in a population-based setting. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2018-03-01
Inclusion criteria included clinical diagnosis of PPA; availability of complete speech, language, and cognitive testing; magnetic resonance imaging performed within 6 months of the cognitive evaluation; and PET carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh Compound-B or florbetapir F 18 brain scan results. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Neurology·2022-08-26
Impaired spatial navigation was associated with conversion to dementia within 2 and 4 years and with key CSF and MRI biomarkers for AD and neurodegeneration in patients with SCD and MCI. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Molecular psychiatry·2025-04-18
Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is proposed as an indicator of transitional disease stage 2 in the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2025-02-17
Among the plasma biomarkers, phosphorylated tau (p-tau) 217 exhibited the highest concordance rate with Aβ (2326 of 2571 [90.5%]) and tau (100 of 120 [83.3%]) PET. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Neurology·2024-12-26
This study examined whether levels of blood biomarkers of amyloid (Aβ 42 /Aβ 40 ratio), tau (p-tau 181 ), neurodegeneration (NfL), and glial activation and neuroinflammation (glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], YKL40, soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 [sTREM2]) collected when participants were cognitively normal are associated with the time to onset of MCI. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Neurology·2025-06-25
Greater neighborhood disadvantage was associated with elevated inflammatory and AD CSF biomarkers cross-sectionally and longitudinal increases in a nonspecific inflammatory blood biomarker. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·JAMA·1995-03-01
These results suggest that the inheritance of APOE epsilon 4 is associated with reduced cerebral parietal metabolism and increased asymmetry in non-demented relatives at risk for probable AD. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Neurology·2009-12-23
In white older adults, prevalent Alzheimer disease (AD) was longitudinally associated with a reduced risk of cancer, and a history of cancer was associated with a reduced risk of AD. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2005-11-01
When proper normative values are used, only age and education, and not race or ethnicity, are associated with higher frequency of MCI. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·JAMA psychiatry·2015-03-01
Although the presence of abnormal levels of amyloid-β (Aβ) is associated with higher rates of progression to clinically classified mild cognitive impairment or dementia, little research has evaluated potentially modifiable moderators of Aβ-related cognitive decline, such as anxiety and depressive symptoms. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·PLoS medicine·2021-06-01
Apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 is the single most important genetic risk factor for cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease (AD), while lifestyle factors such as smoking, drinking, diet, and physical activity also have impact on cognition. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.·JAMA·2016-02-01
Among the 286 autopsied brains of 544 participants, brain mercury levels were positively correlated with the number of seafood meals consumed per week (ρ = 0.16; P = .02). 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 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.