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

Showing 3,301–3,325 of 3,821 studies published 2025 (page 133 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)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

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.

BackgroundPersons living with dementia (PLWD) on hospice care face unique end-of-life (EoL) care challenges. 1 key finding →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

In Mae Pa, the palliative care need prevalence was 2.03 per 1,000, among them, 84.62% had non-cancer conditions and 38.46% had neurodegenerative diseases with frailty and dementia. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Of 142 respondents, 53% supported, 10% were uncertain, and 37% opposed legalizing euthanasia for terminal illness with severe symptoms. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dietary intake moderated the association between several cSVD biomarkers and MoCA scores such that the expected negative association between cSVD biomarkers and cognition was seen at low levels of healthy dietary intake, but not at medium or high levels. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

< 0.0036), the MCRS group exhibited significantly worse performance on word list memory, word list recall, and MMSE-KC compared to the MCI group without slow gait. 2 key findings →

Participants: 81 Evidence: low

In this update, we examine a checklist for real-world evidence use in Medicare drug price negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act, a review of health technology assessment reassessments across major health technology assessment agencies, and two complementary studies that used natural experiment approaches to explore the relationship between herpes zoster vaccination and reduced dementia risk. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Florbetaben (FBB) is a radiopharmaceutical approved by the FDA and EMA in 2014 for the positron emission tomography (PET) imaging of brain amyloid deposition in patients with cognitive impairment who are being evaluated for Alzheimer's disease (AD) or other causes of cognitive decline. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

In 2024, 90% of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees were in a plan that required prior authorization of home health care. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

In highly segregated counties, Black older adults with elevated CVD demonstrated worse memory than those with lower CVD; in less segregated counties, memory levels did not differ by CVD. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The development of more effective disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD) is compromised by the lack of streamlined measures to detect and monitor the full spectrum of neurodegeneration, including white matter pathology, which begins early. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

This study aimed to investigate the bidirectional causal relationship between celiac disease (CD) and the risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) or frontotemporal dementia (FTD) using Mendelian randomization (MR), in order to clarify prior inconsistent findings. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The IVW analysis indicated that antithrombotic agents (odds ratio [OR] = 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-4.34, p = 0.04), HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.07-1.72, p = 0.01), and salicylic acid and derivatives (OR = 2.77, 95% CI = 1.44-5.32, p = 0.002) are a strong risk factor for dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB); diuretics (OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1-1.27, p = 0.047) and calcium channel blockers (OR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.04-1.29, p = 0.007) might be a risk factor for vascular dementia; thyroid preparations (OR = 1.03, 95% CI = 1.01-1.06, p = 0.01), diuretics (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.02-1.11, p = 0.004), and immunosuppressants (OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.01-1.12, p = 0.001), are a risk factor for frontotemporal dementia; HMG CoA reductase inhibitors is a risk factor for dementia in Alzheimer disease (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.05-1.65, p = 0.01). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

This study examines the accuracy of CTseg segmentation software to diagnose Alzheimer's disease dementia and other dementias using routine CT scans from a New Zealand memory service. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The global increase in dementia cases, which is predicted to exceed 152 million by 2050, poses substantial challenges to healthcare systems and caregiving structures. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Dementia is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by a significant decline in cognitive function. 4 key findings →

Participants: 65 Evidence: low

• Understudied Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander populations in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia. • Risk and resiliency factors in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia for American Samoa adults. • Using the Kimberley Indigenous Cognitive Assessment tool to determine ADRD potentially modifiable risk and protective factors. 1 key finding →

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