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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 25,551–25,575 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 1023 of 1086)· 28,180 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; 13,658 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.
The problem with pure recombinant or synthetic antigens used in modern day vaccines is that they are generally far less immunogenic than older style live or killed whole organism vaccines. 5 key findings →
The National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) is responsible for developing and maintaining a database of patient information collected from the 29 Alzheimer disease centers (ADCs) funded by the National Institute on Aging. 5 key findings →
We tested the hypothesis that synaptic defects in the hippocampus of individuals with Alzheimer disease (AD) correlate with the severity of cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →
The reproductive properties of estrogen are well established, but it is now evident that this steroid hormone has substantial modulatory capabilities in nonreproductive systems. 2 key findings →
New technologies have considerable potential to support people with semantic dementia-a form of progressive aphasia-in their everyday lives, but evidence is still sparse. 2 key findings →
Apolipoprotein E (APOE = gene, apoE = protein) plays a central role in plasma lipoprotein metabolism and in lipid transport within tissues. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of age-related dementia, characterized by progressive memory loss and cognitive disturbance. 1 key finding →
The present review integrates findings of published studies that have evaluated the cognitive function of treated and untreated type 2 diabetic patients and provides a detailed overview of the neuropsychological assessments conducted. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by the presence of intracellular neurofibrillary tangles (NFT), extracellular senile plaques (SP), and synaptic loss. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Electrophoresis·2000-10-01
Recent studies have demonstrated the need for complementing cellular genomic information with specific information on expressed proteins, or proteomics, since the correlation between the two is poor. 1 key finding →
The authors have devised, implemented, and tested a fast, spatially accurate technique for calculating the high-dimensional deformation field relating the brain anatomies of an arbitrary pair of subjects. 5 key findings →
Increasing evidence indicates that hyperglycemia is the initiating cause of the tissue damage occurring in diabetes, either through repeated acute changes in cellular glucose metabolism, or through the long-term accumulation of glycated biomolecules and advanced glycation end products (AGEs). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·PubMed·2004-01-01
Alpha-linolenic acid (18:3omega3) deficiency alters the structure and function of membranes and induces minor cerebral dysfunctions, as demonstrated in animal models and subsequently in human infants. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Archives of Neurology·1968-06-01
CONSIDERABLE interest has been focused on the entity of progressive external ophthalmoplegia (PEO) since the report of Kiloh and Nevin in 1951.1These authors were primarily concerned with the pathogenesis of the ocular muscle weakness, concluding that it was virtually always the result of a myopathic process. 2 key findings →
Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is a parasomnia manifested by vivid, often frightening dreams associated with simple or complex motor behavior during REM sleep. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·PubMed·1994-01-01
The pharmacological inhibition of excitatory amino acid neurotransmission has evolved to be a major topic in neuropharmacology since enhanced synaptic action of glutamate and possibly other related neurotransmitters has been suggested to play a role both in acute neurological conditions such as ischemia and epilepsy and in chronic degenerative neurological diseases including Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease and Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
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 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.