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
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 2,776–2,800 of 15,839 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 112 of 634)· 28,580 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; 14,058 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.
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has been considered a transitional state between normal aging and dementia, characterised by memory impairment but normal general cognitive functioning. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Chest·2005-03-01
The prevalence of comorbidities and functional impairment among elderly patients may enhance the risk of operation-related complications, but the importance of these conditions in elderly patients undergoing thoracic surgery remains unclear. 4 key findings →
To investigate the cognitive capacities of a cohort of ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke survivors and to identify the clinical determinants of post-stroke cognitive impairment, we evaluated 237 patients admitted to a Stroke Unit (mean age 59; SD=12.7). 4 key findings →
Understanding preclinical transitions to impairment in cognitive abilities associated with risks for functional difficulty and dementia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Neurology·1995-01-01
The Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) provides ratings of an individual's changes in everyday cognitive functions during the previous 10 years. 4 key findings →
In this work, we demonstrate how computational multi-scale brain modeling links phenomena of different scales and therefore identifies potential disease mechanisms leading the way to improved diagnostics and treatment. 4 key findings →
The N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has a well-documented prognostic value for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and higher levels are associated with cognitive-dysfunction in patients with CVD. 4 key findings →
Neuropsychiatric symptoms are prevalent in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD) and commonly measured using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2020-10-05
Growing evidence has suggested an association between sleep duration and Alzheimer's disease (AD), but it is unclear if sleep duration is a manifestation of the AD disease process. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·European radiology·2015-11-11
The AddNeuroMed and ADNI cohorts were combined giving a total of 329 healthy controls, 421 mild cognitive impairment patients, and 286 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·PloS one·2016-07-14
A growing body of literature has suggested that obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and habitual short sleep duration are linked to poor cognitive function. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Medical hypotheses·2004-01-01
Alzheimer's disease (AD) includes etiologically heterogeneous disorders characterized by senile or presenile dementia, extracellular amyloid protein aggregations containing an insoluble amyloid precursor protein derivative, and intracytoplasmic tau protein aggregations. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Oncogene·2002-05-01
Neurodegeneration and dementia are common complications of AIDS caused by human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection of the central nervous system. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease results from severe cytoskeletal alterations in only a few neuronal types within the human central nervous system. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·1994-01-01
In a neuropathological study of 81 brains of prospectively studied subjects of 80 years of age or older at the time of death, 13 cases (16%), including 4 men and 9 women, had hippocampal sclerosis (HpScl) affecting the vulnerable region of the hippocampus. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Human mutation·2013-04-29
Mutations in the TAR DNA Binding Protein gene (TARDBP), encoding the protein TDP-43, were identified in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients. 4 key findings →
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) are fatal neurodegenerative disorders that are thought to exist on a clinical and pathological spectrum. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Advances in genetics·2015-08-07
At present, there are very few therapeutic options for patients affected by amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%),
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 (3.6% 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.