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.

Protective effects of estrogen and selective estrogen receptor modulators in the brain

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Biology of reproduction 2002-11-01

Within the last few years, there has been a growing interest in the neuroprotective effects of estrogen and the possible beneficial effects of estrogen in neurodegenerative diseases such as stroke, Alzheimer disease, and Parkinson disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

These findings suggest that in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, hippocampal volume is influenced in part by schizophrenia susceptibility genes and an interaction of these genes with fetal hypoxia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

The neuropeptide substance P and its receptor, the neurokinin 1 receptor (NK(1)R) have been proposed as possible targets for new antidepressant therapies. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

We have previously shown that chronic treatment with the monoclonal antibody m266, which is specific for amyloid beta-peptide (Abeta), increases plasma concentrations of Abeta and reduces Abeta burden in the PDAPP transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

We studied the effect of microtubule-associated tau protein on trafficking of vesicles and organelles in primary cortical neurons, retinal ganglion cells, and neuroblastoma cells. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Alterations in transcription, RNA editing, translation, protein processing, and clearance are a consistent feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) brain. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The authors illustrate the spectrum of clinical and imaging patterns in primary progressive aphasia (PPA), a syndrome of slowly progressive speech and language impairment occurring with neurodegenerative disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Regulating factors for microglial activation

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Biological & pharmaceutical bulletin 2002-08-01

Microglia, residential macrophages in the central nervous system, can release a variety of factors including cytokines, chemokines, etc. to regulate the communication among neuronal and other types of glial cells. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The gene encoding the beta-site amyloid precursor protein cleaving enzyme 2 (BACE2) has been determined to be located on the long arm of chromosome 21 at 21q22.3. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Amyloid beta protein 40 (Abeta40) and 42 Abeta42, major components of senile plaque amyloids, are physiological peptides present in the brain, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The transition from the partially folded soluble Abeta monomer to insoluble Abeta amyloidfibrils is seminal to the formation and growth of amyloid plaques in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Assessment of late life depression

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Biological psychiatry 2002-08-01

This article focuses on diagnostic and nosologic challenges intrinsic to geriatric depression, including characteristics interfering with symptom and syndrome ascertainment, the impact of medical and cognitive disorders, the usefulness of screening instruments, and barriers imposed by treatment settings. 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
  • 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.

1,032 records (3.8% 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