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 451–475 of 808 studies published 2013(page 19 of 33)· 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.
The aim of this study was to explore concentrations differences of soluble amyloid precursor protein (sAPP) α and β in blood plasma in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and cognitively healthy age-matched control subjects, as well as patients with behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2013-09-01
Patients with aMCI who had epilepsy presented with symptoms of cognitive decline 6.8 years earlier than patients with aMCI who did not have epilepsy (64.3 vs 71.1 years; P = .02). 2 key findings →
In contrast, all Alzheimer's disease variants showed diffuse patterns of (11)C-labelled Pittsburgh compound B binding, with posterior cortical atrophy additionally showing elevated uptake in occipital cortex compared with early-onset Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Brain·2013-08-26
Genome-wide association studies have identified a number of risk variants for Alzheimer’s disease implicated in inflammatory responses (Bettens et al., 2013); exome sequencing has revealed polymorphisms in the microglial receptor TREM2 gene as a rare but significant risk for Alzheimer’s disease (Guerreiro et al., 2013; Jonsson et al., 2013); and recently, the CD33 risk allele has been shown to inhibit microglial clearance of amyloid-β (Bradshaw et al., 2013; Griciuc et al., 2013). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Clinical epidemiology·2013-04-26
As life expectancy lengthens, dementia is becoming a significant human condition in terms of its prevalence and cost to society worldwide. 1 key finding →
The prevention of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has become a real challenge due to its rising prevalence and the lack of an effective cure. 3 key findings →
Although age remains the main risk factor to suffer Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VD), type 2 diabetes (T2D) has turned up as a relevant risk factor for dementia. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Human brain mapping·2013-11-12
The salience network (SN) serves to identify salient stimuli and to switch between the central executive network (CEN) and the default-mode network (DMN), both of which are impaired in Alzheimer's disease (AD)/amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). 3 key findings →
Soluble oligomers of the amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide cause neurotoxicity, synaptic dysfunction, and memory impairments that underlie Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2013-02-01
Therapies designed to decrease the level of SOD1 are currently in a clinical trial for patients with superoxide dismutase (SOD1)-linked familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Gerontology·2013-08-17
Frailty is commonly considered as a syndrome with several symptoms, including weight loss, exhaustion, weakness, slow walking speed and physical inactivity. 4 key findings →
Neuropsychiatric symptoms are prevalent in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD) and commonly measured using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·Human mutation·2013-04-29
Mutations in the TAR DNA Binding Protein gene (TARDBP), encoding the protein TDP-43, were identified in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) patients. 4 key findings →
The specific CB2 cannabinoid receptor agonist JWH-133 induced cognitive improvement in double AβPP/PS1 transgenic mice, a genetic model of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100.·The Gerontologist·2013-01-23
When using ethnic group-specific norms, NP and functional abilities predicted diagnosis in both groups with no significant differences but BPS was only significant in Hispanics. 5 key findings →
Amyloid PET imaging is a novel diagnostic test that can detect in living humans one of the two defining pathologic lesions of Alzheimer disease, amyloid-β deposition in the brain. 3 key findings →
Astrocytosis shows a distinct regional pattern in AD brain compared to fibrillar Aβ, suggesting that different types of astrocytes may be associated with the pathophysiological processes in AD. 3 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.