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
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 3,151–3,175 of 3,858 studies published 2025(page 127 of 155)· 27,780 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; 13,259 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.
Among 1,706 participants (mean age 56 years, 62% female, 28% Black), midlife NAFLD vs no NAFLD was associated with greater late-life WMH volume (difference per SD 0.19, 95% CI 0.06-0.31) and faster late-life WMH increase over 6 years (difference in annual change, SD 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-0.51), suggesting accumulating vascular pathology. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurological Sciences·2025-08-25
In the whole sample, both PRSs were associated with the strength of correlation between GMV and different serotonin receptors and fluorodopa uptake. 2 key findings →
Research revealed a significant locus of susceptibility for LOAD on the Bridging Integrator 1 (BIN1) that is situated on chromosome 2q14.3 and is identified at the time of the most significant susceptibility gene of LOAD. 2 key findings →
Genome-wide association studies (GWASs) have identified thousands of putative disease-causing variants with unknown regulatory effects. 1 key finding →
Within the limitations of measuring in vitro equilibrium binding activity of in‐house recombinant antibodies to aqueously extracted Aβ from human postmortem brain tissue, we could not discern a population of Aβ aggregates ( e.g . protofibrils) accessible to one antibody but not the other two. 3 key findings →
The anti-amyloid monoclonal antibody lecanemab received the US accelerated approval for mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia stage of Alzheimer disease in January 2023, which was converted into traditional approval in June 2023. 5 key findings →
Our results show that lecanemab exhibits high binding affinity to amyloid-β fibril structures that have a flexible N-terminus in common, as is the case for type I, type II and murine type III amyloid-β fibril polymorphs, which resemble or are identical to human structures observed in sporadic and familial cases of Alzheimer's disease, including a case with the Arctic (E22G) mutation. 5 key findings →
Disaster risk reduction efforts in the education sector not only create a safer environment but also encourage sustainable development. 1 key finding →
Mean performance on knowledge of dementia risk factor mitigation strategies significantly increased after viewing the animation (p < .001), with a clinically meaningful effect (mean change = 3.63). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Buildings·2025-02-09
The construction sector is among the most dangerous industries, recognized for its significant rate of accidents with even more serious consequences, especially in developing countries. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Behavioral Sciences·2025-09-29
This study aims to investigate the syntactic complexity in individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD) by conducting a comprehensive analysis that incorporates mean dependency distance (MDD), fine-grained grammatical metrics, and dependency network structures. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Dementia·2025-02-26
The present study addresses the perspectives of Israeli family caregivers and migrant care workers on behavioral problems of persons with dementia. 2 key findings →
Four themes were identified, along with eleven sub-themes associated with them: cognitive-behavioral shift (transitioning family roles, recognizing disease characteristics, focusing on health management, and responding positively and effectively); personal strength enhancement (enhancing coping capacity, increased psychological resilience and increased responsibility); improved relationships with others (harmonizing in family relations and benefiting from social interactions); and changes in life perceptions (reshaping of values, and reconstructing the meaning of life). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Revista CUIDARTE·2025-01-01
The study found significant correlations between caregiver competence, QoL, and burden/stress with the QoL of individuals with dementia. 4 key findings →
As the rates of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD and related dementias (ADRD) in the United States steadily rise, so too does the demand for informal caregiving. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·BMC Medical Ethics·2025-01-20
The findings revealed that Japanese physicians did not display support for euthanasia (2%) and assisted suicide (1%); however, the general public supported euthanasia (33%) and assisted suicide (34%). 5 key findings →
Compared to persons without IDD, cumulative incidence of dementia was on average 4.27 and 5.33 times higher in persons with Non-DS IDD and DS respectively and period prevalence of dementia was on average 4.87 and 5.93 times higher in persons with Non-DS IDD and DS respectively. 2 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%),
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.