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 2,476–2,500 of 3,821 studies published 2025(page 100 of 153)· 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.
LAPs contained five monosaccharides. LAPs improved cognitive function and increased the number of Nissl bodies, lactate secretion, the IL-10 content, the relative fluorescence intensity of the IBA1 and AXL proteins, and the protein expression levels of AXL, Mertk, Glut1, HK2, PI3K, p-Akt/Akt, p-mTOR/mTOR and HIF-1α of immune-tolerant AD mice. 5 key findings →
Autophagic markers beclin 1, LC3II and p62, and lysosome-related marker cathepsin B, all upregulated in AD astrocytes, were significantly reduced, while autophagic flux was rescued, by stabilizing 20 nm-MERCS. 3 key findings →
Ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1) is a critical deubiquitinating enzyme that is highly expressed in the central nervous system, where it participates in protein degradation and turnover as part of the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS). 1 key finding →
The advanced glycation end-products (AGEs) are toxic molecules result from non-enzymatic interactions of sugar with lipids or proteins. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia in elderly individuals worldwide; however, all mechanisms leading to disease onset and progression are not well understood. 3 key findings →
The assembly of tau protein into amyloid filaments through templated seeding is believed to underlie the propagation of pathology in neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other tauopathies. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·NeuroImage Clinical·2025-01-01
• EEG microstate analyses were performed in a cohort of autosomal dominant AD. • Coverage of class C decreased in symptomatic mutation carriers • Coverage of class D decreased in presymptomatic and symptomatic mutation carriers. • Coverage of class E increased in presymptomatic and symptomatic mutation carriers. • The findings may support presymptomatic changes in resting-state neuronal networks. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurotherapeutics·2025-02-11
Amyloidoses, which are characterized by abnormal accumulation of amyloid proteins leading to organ dysfunction, represent a major therapeutic challenge. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Pharmaceuticals·2025-04-26
The results showed that T. chuii extracts could protect neuronal cells from neurotoxic damage, especially against L-glutamate and H2O2. 4 key findings →
The project is expected to generate evidence on the effectiveness, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of multidomain interventions implemented across diverse real-world settings, including community, hospital, and long-term care. 5 key findings →
Consistent with previous research, transfer gains from the OMT condition to an untrained VM task suggest that olfaction may contribute to a‐modal representations of memory. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·PLoS ONE·2025-04-24
Emotion scores for fear and surprise were significantly higher for the AD group than for the MCI group during dual tasks (p=0.016), while emotion scores for joy were significantly higher for the MCI group than for the AD group during creative activities (p=0.012). 4 key findings →
Identifying strategies to enhance patient engagement and to control healthcare costs promotes a responsive and efficient healthcare system. 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.