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
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 226–250 of 531 studies published 2006(page 10 of 22)· 27,380 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; 12,859 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.
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated cognitive impairment, a significant cause of morbidity, affects up to 30% of HIV-infected people. 3 key findings →
Numerous factors need to be taken into account when managing a patient with Parkinson's disease (PD) after deep brain stimulation (DBS). 5 key findings →
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is generally referred to the transitional zone between normal cognitive function and early dementia or clinically probable Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Anesthesiology·2006-05-01
The common inhalation anesthetic isoflurane has previously been reported to enhance the aggregation and cytotoxicity of the Alzheimer disease-associated amyloid beta protein (Abeta), the principal peptide component of cerebral beta-amyloid deposits. 4 key findings →
Recently, the relationship between cognitive status and the neuropathological stages of a newly proposed staging procedure for Parkinson's disease (PD) was assessed in a cohort of 88 individuals. 4 key findings →
A strategy of targeting type-specific BPSD may be beneficial, such as environmental stimulus control for DLB patients who are prone to have hallucinations, design of a pacing path for patients with FTD who need support for symptoms of wandering and emotional support for patients with VaD who are susceptible to depression. 1 key finding →
Mild cognitively impaired patients with memory plus other cognitive domain deficits, rather than those with pure amnestic MCI, constituted the high-risk group. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2006-07-01
These CSF A beta 42 findings are consistent with acceleration by the APOE*4 allele of pathogenic A beta 42 brain deposition starting in later middle age in persons with normal cognition. 2 key findings →
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 →
Growing evidence supports a strong and likely causal association between cardiovascular disease (CVD), and its risk factors, with incidence of cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2006-11-09
Older women with low estradiol levels were more likely to experience decline in global cognitive function and verbal memory, and a similar trend was observed for verbal memory in men. 4 key findings →
Genetic variations in promoter sequences that alter gene expression play a prominent role in increasing susceptibility to complex diseases. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Human brain mapping·2006-12-01
Higher cognitive inhibitory and attention functions have been shown to develop throughout adolescence, presumably concurrent with anatomical brain maturational changes. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2006-01-01
Patients with MCI showed no significant difference (P>.05) in the number of diffuse plaques from that in normal controls or patients with EAD. 3 key findings →
Dysfunction of cholinergic basal forebrain (CBF) neurons of the nucleus basalis (NB) is a cardinal feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and correlates with cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
The results demonstrate that functional connectivity can be an effective marker for the detection of changes in brain function in MCI subjects. 1 key finding →
When the clinical syndrome of MCI evolves on a neurodegenerative basis, the multiple-domain type of MCI has a less favorable prognosis than the amnestic type and may represent a more advanced prodromal stage of dementia. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Human mutation·2006-07-01
The varied ways in which mutations in presenilins (PSEN1 and PSEN2) affect amyloid b precursor protein (APP) processing in causing early-onset familial Alzheimer disease (FAD) are complex and not yet properly understood. 4 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 27,380 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.