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 476–500 of 808 studies published 2013(page 20 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.
How experienced psychiatrists view the capacity of patients with Alzheimer disease for consenting to research and for appointing a proxy may be related to the patients' conceptualization and memory functioning. 1 key finding →
The clusters of significant depression and compensation were further used as volumetric regions of interest (ROIs) in a brain interregional correlation analysis in each prodromal AD subgroup to explore metabolic connectivity. 3 key findings →
Advances in AD biomarker research have demonstrated changes in amyloid-beta (Aβ), brain metabolism and other pathophysiologies prior to the onset of memory loss, with some markers possibly changing one or two decades earlier. 3 key findings →
Researchers have begun to characterize the subtle biological and cognitive processes that precede the clinical onset of Alzheimer disease (AD), and to set the stage for accelerated evaluation of experimental treatments to delay the onset, reduce the risk of, or completely prevent clinical decline. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100.·FEBS letters·2013-05-16
For 20 years the amyloid cascade hypothesis of Alzheimer disease (AD) has placed the amyloid-β peptide (Aβ), formed from the amyloid precursor protein (APP), centre stage in the process of neurodegeneration. 4 key findings →
We have recently shown acetylation of tau at lysine residue 280 (AC-K280) to be a disease-specific modification in Alzheimer disease (AD), corticobasal degeneration, and progressive supranuclear palsy, likely representing a major regulatory tau modification. 4 key findings →
Processing of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) by γ-secretase results in generation of Aβ peptides of different lengths ranging from 51 to 30 residues. 4 key findings →
Current evidence indicates that spaced-retrieval training is effective in enabling people with dementia to learn new information and behavioral strategies. 3 key findings →
In 3T MRI visually inspected by experts, quantification of hippocampal volume and signal can increase the detection of hippocampal sclerosis in 28% of patients with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100.·Journal of neurology·2013-07-23
Vascular factors are thought to contribute to the development of disease pathology in neurodegenerative dementia such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
It appears that changes in the patients' behavior and in the interpersonal relations between caregivers and patients are associated with caregiver depression. 4 key findings →
The Northwestern University SuperAging Project recruits community dwellers over the age of 80 who have unusually high performance on tests of episodic memory. 1 key finding →
This study presents the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen (ECAS), developed for ALS patients with physical disability for use by health care professionals. 1 key finding →
The increasing prevalence of cognitive impairment among the older adult population warrants attention to the identification of practices that may minimize the progression of early forms of cognitive impairment, including the transitional stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), to permanent stages of dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Respiratory medicine·2013-06-27
Awareness of palliative care as an option for patients with COPD needs to increase in palliative care services, physicians and the general public. 1 key finding →
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.