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 426–450 of 1,139 studies published 2023(page 18 of 46)· 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 54 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2023-09-27
Studies have shown that multimorbidity may be associated with the Alzheimer's disease (AD) stages, but it has not been fully characterized in patients without dementia. 5 key findings →
We obtained a predictive accuracy of 0.71 (95 % CI [0.59, 0.84]) with an AUC of 0.69 in the HRS test dataset and got an accuracy of 0.62 (95 % CI [0.56, 0.68]) with an AUC of 0.63 in the ROSMAP dataset. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100.·Nature neuroscience·2023-06-01
Cerebrovascular dysregulation is a hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD), but the changes that occur in specific cell types have not been fully characterized. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100.·Brain communications·2023-04-04
Fusion of all five data modalities (n = 111) yielded two subtypes (n S1 = 53, n S2 = 58), which were nominally associated with diffuse amyloid plaques; however, this effect was not significant after correction for multiple testing. 5 key findings →
GMM-based cutoffs classified less subjects as T+, mainly in the A- CN (<3.4% vs >28.5%) and A+ CN (<14.5% vs >42.9%) groups and showed higher agreement with visual rating (ICC=0.91 vs ICC<0.62) than published cutoffs. 3 key findings →
CR varied across five cognitive assessments and was greater in female participants, associated with longer survival, and weakly associated with educational attainment or APOE ε4 allele. 5 key findings →
Bivariate analyses indicated that nonmetro dementia caregivers were less racially/ethnically diverse (82.7% White, non-Hispanic) and more were spouses/partners (20.2%) than their metro counterparts (66.6% White, non-Hispanic; 13.3% spouses/partners). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Clinical chemistry·2023-04-01
Plasma GFAP effectively distinguished AD dementia from multiple neurodegenerative diseases, gradually increased across the AD continuum, predicted the individual risk of AD progression, and strongly correlated with AD CSF/neuroimaging biomarkers. 2 key findings →
This article describes the public health impact of Alzheimer's disease, including prevalence and incidence, mortality and morbidity, use and costs of care, and the overall impact on family caregivers, the dementia workforce and society. 3 key findings →
A location dynamics model and ADRD-focused future directions are offered for guiding rural practitioners, researchers, and policymakers in mitigating rural disparities. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·PloS one·2023-11-16
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), dementia is the seventh leading reason of death among all illnesses and one of the leading causes of disability among the world's elderly people. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Science immunology·2023-04-07
Macrophages are central orchestrators of the tissue response to injury, with distinct macrophage activation states playing key roles in fibrosis progression and resolution. 4 key findings →
The 21-point Brain Care Score (BCS) was developed through a modified Delphi process in partnership with practitioners and patients to promote behavior changes and lifestyle choices in order to sustainably reduce the risk of dementia and stroke. 4 key findings →
Lenore Ackerman *Correspondence: David Geffen School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Box 951738, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1738 telephone: 310-794-0206; E-mail Address: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4192-7649 Department of Urology and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003430AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Overactive bladder, including symptoms of increased urinary frequency, urgency, and incontinence, is more prevalent than diabetes, affecting 1 in 6 adults in the United States.1,2 Occurring more commonly among women and older adults, untreated overactive bladder is associated with reduced quality of life, increased incidence of depression and anxiety, increased risk of experiencing falls/fractures, and increased institutionalization. 5 key findings →
We examined factors associated with self-reported medication nonadherence in well-characterized community-based cohort of older adults. 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 27,780 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.