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 326–350 of 974 studies published 2015(page 14 of 39)· 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2015-01-30
It has been well established that neuronal loss within the cholinergic nucleus basalis of Meynert (nbM) correlates with cognitive decline in dementing disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·European radiology·2015-06-05
Key points • Decreasing CBF relates to more advanced AD stages in all supratentorial regions. • The reduction of CBF does not reach a bottom level. • ASL-CBF has potential as a measure for disease progression in AD. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2015-01-29
Microglia are phagocytic cells that survey the brain and perform neuroprotective functions in response to tissue damage, but their activating receptors are largely unknown. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2015-04-22
Diagnoses of dementia, probable AD, and MCI in 636 autopsied subjects from the Religious Order Study and the Rush Memory and Aging Project were based on clinical evaluation and cognitive performance tests. 4 key findings →
Florbetaben PET shows high sensitivity and specificity for the detection of histopathology-confirmed neuritic β-amyloid plaques and may thus be a valuable adjunct to clinical diagnosis, particularly for the exclusion of AD.
Huntington's disease is a neurodegenerative disorder caused by an abnormal CAG repeat expansion within exon 1 of the huntingtin gene HTT. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·BMJ open·2015-11-16
Delirium affected a fifth of acute medical admissions and a third of those aged ≥75 years, and was associated with increased mortality, institutionalisation and dependency, but not with increased risk of re-admission on follow-up. 4 key findings →
People continue to receive disease-focused therapies at the end of life rather than therapies exclusively for palliation of symptoms, suggesting that treatments may vary according to the person's primary diagnosis. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Biological psychiatry·2015-03-05
ECT-induced neuroplasticity in the hippocampus and amygdala relates to improved clinical response and is pronounced in regions with prominent connections to ventromedial prefrontal cortex and other limbic structures. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Molecular Psychiatry·2015-08-25
Genome-wide polygenic scores (GPS), which aggregate the effects of thousands of DNA variants from genome-wide association studies (GWAS), have the potential to make genetic predictions for individuals. 1 key finding →
The objective of this study was to compare the effect of multisensory stimulation environment (MSSE) and one-to-one activity sessions in the symptomatology of elderly individuals with severe dementia. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2015-01-22
Key experiments using fibril-free AβO solutions demonstrated that while Aβ is essential for memory loss, the fibrillar Aβ in amyloid deposits is not the agent. 2 key findings →
This human study is based on an established cohort of "SuperAgers," 80+-year-old individuals with episodic memory function at a level equal to, or better than, individuals 20-30 years younger. 4 key findings →
Type 2 diabetes (T2DM), Alzheimer's disease (AD), and insulin resistance are age-related conditions and increased prevalence is of public concern. 1 key finding →
Down syndrome, which arises in individuals carrying an extra copy of chromosome 21, is associated with a greatly increased risk of early-onset Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2015-02-16
Diabetes mellitus is associated with an increase in the risk of dementia and the proportion of patients who convert from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia. 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.