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.

Hippocampal sclerosis is a progressive disorder: a longitudinal volumetric MRI study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2003-03-01

Twelve patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy and unilateral hippocampal sclerosis had repeat volumetric magnetic resonance imaging scans after a mean of 3.4 years to determine whether progressive hippocampal volume loss occurred. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

High-resolution magnetic resonance microscopy (MRM) was used to determine regional brain volumetric changes in a mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The glutamatergic system and Alzheimer's disease: therapeutic implications

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. CNS drugs 2003-01-01

Alzheimer's disease affects nearly 5 million Americans currently and, as a result of the baby boomer cohort, is predicted to affect 14 million Americans and 22 million persons totally worldwide in just a few decades. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

The discovery of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience 2003-03-31

On November 3, 1906, a clinical psychiatrist and neuroanatomist, Alois Alzheimer, reported "A peculiar severe disease process of the cerebral cortex" to the 37th Meeting of South-West German Psychiatrists in Tubingen, He described a 50-year-old woman whom he had followed from her admission for paranoia, progressive sleep and memory disturbance, aggression, and confusion, until her death 5 years later. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

A Broken α-Helix in Folded α-Synuclein

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2003-04-01

alpha-Synuclein is a small cytosolic protein of presynaptic nerve terminals composed of seven 11-residue repeats and a hydrophilic tail. alpha-Synuclein misfolding and dysfunction may contribute to the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease and neurodegenerative dementias, but its normal folding and function are unknown. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer's amyloid precursor protein 695 (APP) is a plasma membrane protein, which is known to be the source of the toxic amyloid beta (Abeta) peptide associated with the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

High-dose vitamin supplementation reduces homocysteine levels in patients with AD. 2 key findings →

Design: open-label trial Participants: 69 Evidence: high

Immunostaining of adenosine receptors in the hippocampus and cerebral cortex from necropsies of Alzheimer disease (AD) patients shows that there is a change in the pattern of expression and a redistribution of receptors in these brain areas when compared with samples from controls. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The neurotrophin hypothesis proposes that repetitive neuronal activity enhances the expression, secretion and actions of neurotrophins to modify synaptic transmission and connectivity thereby providing a connection between neuronal activity and synaptic plasticity. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dementia with Lewy bodies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Seminars in clinical neuropsychiatry 2003-01-01

The objective was to summarize recent findings about the clinical features, diagnosis and investigation of dementia with Lewy (DLB) bodies, together with its neuropathology, neurochemistry and genetics. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Barriers to limiting the practice of feeding tube placement in advanced dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Journal of palliative medicine 2003-12-01

We find a notable discord between physician opinion, reported practice, and the literature regarding PEG tubes in advanced dementia that reveals some of the barriers to decreasing the referral of these patients for PEG. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Assessment by a speech therapist, staffing ratios, advance directives, fiscal considerations, and specialized dementia units are potentially modifiable factors in nursing homes that may influence the practice of tube feeding in advanced cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Recently, a frequent prion protein gene (PRNP) polymorphism consisting of a methionine (M) for valine (V) substitution at codon 129 has been associated with cognitive impairment in elderly individuals. 4 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