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.

Detection of an Alzheimer disease pattern of cerebral metabolism in Down syndrome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Dementia (Basel, Switzerland) 1994-03-01

Correlational analysis of cerebral metabolic (rCMRglc) data obtained with positron emission tomography (PET) assesses group differences and has demonstrated reduced frontal-parietal rCMRglc interdependencies in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 15 Evidence: moderate

The touchscreen operant platform for testing learning and memory in rats and mice

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Nature protocols 2013-09-19

An increasingly popular method of assessing cognitive functions in rodents is the automated touchscreen platform, on which a number of different cognitive tests can be run in a manner very similar to touchscreen methods currently used to test human subjects. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neuroinflammation is associated with virtually all major neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Education and change in cognitive function. The Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Annals of epidemiology 1995-01-01

The association between educational attainment and decline in cognitive function over an interval of 1 year was examined for 14,883 subjects 18 years and older in the National Institute of Mental Health Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study. 4 key findings →

Participants: 14,883 Evidence: low

Perspectives on depression, mild cognitive impairment, and cognitive decline

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Archives of general psychiatry 2006-02-01

Cognitive impairment and late-life depression are associated with increased risk for subsequent dementia; however, investigations of these phenomena appear to be proceeding along separate tracks. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Of 11 subjects with average AUCs above 500,000 units, 7 (64%) developed a central LBD compared to 1 of 20 (5%), with AUCs below the cutoff value (P = 0.0011 by log-rank test). 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

We believe this to be the first demonstration of myelin loss in MCI, Alzheimer's disease, and vascular dementia using a method that provides a quantitative magnetic resonance imaging-based measure of myelin. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Role of nitric oxide in inflammation-mediated neurodegeneration

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2002-05-01

Increasing evidence has suggested that inflammation in the brain is closely associated with the pathogenesis of several degenerative neurologic disorders, including Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's diseases, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and AIDS dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

They belong to the spectrum of neurodegenerative diseases that result in death or dysfunction of neurons with similarities to Alzheimer disease (AD) but also distinctive differences (reviewed (Canet et al., Front Cell Neurosci 12: 307, 2018)). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) have been implicated in the chronic complications of diabetes mellitus and have been reported to play an important role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

This manuscript is the second part of a two-part description of the current status of understanding of the network function of the brain in health and disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The World Health Organization reports that 47.5 million people are affected by dementia worldwide. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and cortocobasal degeneration (CBD) are often clinically confused with each other because they share a rapid disease progression, parkinsonism that responds poorly or transiently to levodopa therapy, and associated signs (e.g., ocular abnormalities, pyramidal signs and cognitive involvement). 5 key findings →

Participants: 51 Evidence: low

Treatments for neurodegenerative disorders remain rare, but recent FDA approvals, such as lecanemab and aducanumab for Alzheimer disease (MIM: 607822), highlight the importance of the underlying biological mechanisms in driving discovery and creating disease modifying therapies. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) dysfunction is a hallmark of several neurodegenerative diseases, including frontotemporal dementia, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Latin America’s diverse genetic landscape provides a unique opportunity to study Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 2,162 Evidence: low

= 0.005). Cox regression analysis revealed that polypharmacy was significantly associated with a reduced risk of MCI progression to dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 0.78) after adjusting for covariates. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Amyloid PET imaging is a novel diagnostic test that can detect in living humans one of the two defining pathologic lesions of Alzheimer disease, amyloid-β deposition in the brain. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

In younger controls, SUV peak was observed in the temporal lobe with values of approximately 3.0 for 11 C-RO-963, 1.5 for 11 C-RO-643, and 3.5 for 18 F-RO-948. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Parkinson's disease (PD) and frontotemporal dementia/amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (FTD/ALS) are insidious and incurable neurodegenerative diseases that represent a significant burden to affected individuals, caregivers, and an ageing population. 1 key finding →

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
  • 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.

1,048 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