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.

APOE and cognitive decline in preclinical Alzheimer disease and non-demented aging

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Neurology 2004-09-01

Although possession of the APOE epsilon4 allele is a risk factor for AD in old age, it does not modify the progression of the disease during the preclinical period. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Among 2985 nondemented individuals, 601 were diagnosed with MCI, resulting in a prevalence of 20.1% for total MCI, 13.2% for amnestic MCI (aMCI), and 7.0% for non-amnestic MCI (naMCI). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

3-4-(2-Fluoro-alpha-methyl-[1,1'-biphenyl]-4-acetyloxy)-3-methoxyphenyl]-2-propenoic acid 4-nitrooxy butyl ester (NCX-2216), a nitric oxide (NO)-releasing derivative of the cyclooxygenase-1-preferring nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) flurbiprofen, dramatically reduced both beta-amyloid (Abeta) loads and Congo red staining in doubly transgenic (Tg) amyloid precursor protein plus presenilin-1 mice when administered at 375 ppm in diet between 7 and 12 months of age. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Eighty respondents (8.1%) care for 90 individuals with neurocognitive disorders, a majority of whom are parents of the respondent. 5 key findings →

Participants: 982 Evidence: low

There were no overall differences between patients with breast cancer and controls before systemic treatment, but there may be pretreatment cognitive impairment within subgroups of patient cases with greater tumor or comorbidity burden. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Recently, we have shown that green tea polyphenol (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) exerts a beneficial role on reducing brain Abeta levels, resulting in mitigation of cerebral amyloidosis in a mouse model of Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Amyloid precursor protein (APP) proteolysis is required for production of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides that comprise β-amyloid plaques in brains of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Amyloid precursor protein (APP) proteolysis is essential for production of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptides that form β-amyloid plaques in brains of Alzheimer disease (AD) patients. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Anti-Abeta immunotherapy in transgenic mice reduces both diffuse and compact amyloid deposits, improves memory function and clears early-stage phospho-tau aggregates. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's Disease (AD), Parkinson's Disease (PD), Lewy Body Disease (LBD), and related dementias, represent a global health challenge, particularly in aging populations. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common progressive dementia and is pathologically characterized by brain deposition of amyloid-beta (Abeta) peptide as senile plaques. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Doubly transgenic mice expressing both a mutated amyloid precursor protein and a mutated presenilin-1 protein accumulate A(beta) deposits as they age. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

After its completion in 2028, the EARHLI trial should offer evidence on the effect of hearing treatment versus a health education control on cognitive performance, social engagement, and brain organization/connectivity in 55- to 75-year-old community-dwelling adults with early ARHL and amnestic mild cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →

Evidence: high

The abnormal accumulation of hyperphosphorylated tau in neurofibrillary tangles is a hallmark of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Using a stress process model, risk factors (caregiving stressors, caregiver health, and negative social interactions) and protective factors (caregiving appraisals and social resources) were examined as predictors of family caregiver well-being (depression and life satisfaction). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Using LGBTQ+ Social Networks, Aging, and Policy Study Wave 3 data (N = 982), this study examines how caregiving for individuals with mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, and related dementias (MCI/ADRD) impacts everyday stressors, discrimination, and health outcomes among LGBTQ+ older adults in the Southern United States. 1 key finding →

Participants: 982 Evidence: low

6.98 [2.44-19.95]; p < 0.05) driven primarily by self-identified Black race and age, while none with A and T. ASCVD risk score was also associated with WMHs ((β=0.42 ± 0.22; p = 0.05). 4 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

↑ 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 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed