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 2,801–2,825 of 3,821 studies published 2025(page 113 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.
Tauopathies are neurodegenerative disorders characterized by the abnormal accumulation and aggregation of hyperphosphorylated tau protein. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Immunobiology·2025-07-01
Dementia encompasses a range of neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) presenting with progressive decline in memory, cognition, language and ability to complete daily tasks. 5 key findings →
Tau pathology in the locus coeruleus (LC) is associated with several neurodegenerative conditions including Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Redox Biology·2025-08-30
Synaptic loss is a key factor in the cognitive decline observed during aging and in neurodegenerative diseases such as dementia, where synaptopathy plays a central role in hippocampal dysfunction. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·BMC Public Health·2025-07-02
The study determined an adequate sample size (KMO = 0.67), with sufficient item correlations for factor analysis (χ2 = 449.74; p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
BackgroundEvidence on the effects of caregiver-assisted combined exercise and cognitive interventions for persons with dementia (PwD) is inconsistent. 2 key findings →
Higher MIND diet scores during the follow-up were associated with fewer reactive microglia (i.e., less neuroinflammation) in the hippocampus when controlled for age at death, sex, education, calories, and AD pathology (β=-0.035, SE=0.02, p = 0.045), but not with total microglia (β=-4.88, SE=3.08, p = 0.114). 5 key findings →
Cognitive training, whether combined with active or sham tDCS, led to significantly increased fractional anisotropy averaged across all brain regions, indicating an overall improvement in white matter integrity. 5 key findings →
The intervention group showed a significantly lower delirium incidence (34% versus 18%, p =0.010) and earlier detection of delirium after hospitalization (3.2 versus 2.2 days, p =0.035). 5 key findings →
BackgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder frequently associated with dysphagia, leading to malnutrition, dehydration, and aspiration pneumonia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·BMJ Open·2025-08-01
Interprofessional case conferences may lead to more awareness regarding gaps in primary palliative care, one's own care routines or a lack of psychosocial support. 5 key findings →
Cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD), a major contributor to stroke, cognitive decline, and vascular dementia, accounts for around 25% of ischemic strokes and significantly impacts age-related neurological disability. 1 key finding →
• APOE4 carriers exhibit cerebrovascular dysfunction. • Endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) represent cell populations involved in facilitating vascular repair. • In APOE4 carriers, EPC colony count is associated with cerebral small vessel disease. • EPC colony count may indicate activation of mechanisms which protect cerebrovascular function in APOE4 carriers prior to the development of cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Advanced Neurology·2025-01-16
Cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) is one of the most common vascular diseases of the brain, primarily diagnosed using magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers. 5 key findings →
On March 12–14, 2024, the National Institute on Aging (NIA) together with the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) led a workshop exploring clinically meaningful changes in the context of Alzheimer's Disease and Alzheimer's Disease Related Dementias (AD/ADRD) clinical trials ( https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/dbsr/workshops/clinically‐meaningful‐outcomes‐ad‐adrd‐trials ). 5 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.