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 476–500 of 974 studies published 2015(page 20 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.
We conclude that variations in morphologies among microglial cells, and cells of macrophage lineage, can help guide future work connecting neuroinflammatory mechanisms with specific neurodegenerative disease subtypes. 3 key findings →
The consensus criteria for the diagnosis and classification of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) have served as an important tool in studying this group of disorders. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease marked by deficits in episodic memory, working memory (WM), and executive function. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is recognized to have a long presymptomatic period, during which there is progressive accumulation of molecular pathology, followed by inexorable neuronal damage. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2015-10-06
Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients and those with high-risk mild cognitive impairment are increasingly considered to have dysfunction syndromes. 4 key findings →
Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) is a DAP12-associated receptor expressed in microglia, macrophages, and other myeloid-derived cells. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Molecular psychiatry·2015-07-21
We hypothesized that de novo variants (DNV) might participate in the genetic determinism of sporadic early-onset Alzheimer disease (EOAD, onset before 65 years). 4 key findings →
The original validation study for the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) suggests a cutoff score of 26; however, this may be too stringent for older adults, particularly for those with less education. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurology·2015-10-09
We quantitated risk of progression to dementia in elderly persons without dementia from 2 population-based studies, the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) and Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA), aged 70 to 89 years at enrollment. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2015-05-11
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, leading to memory impairment in up to 65% of patients. 4 key findings →
This benefit is being offered at no cost to eligible Medicare recipients; however, recent reports suggest that few persons are taking advantage of it (1–3) and who is using it is unclear. 2 key findings →
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique that is increasingly used in research and clinical settings to enhance the effects of cognitive training. 1 key finding →
Most people in Germany die in institutions; the most common place of death is still the hospital, where more than half of all deaths take place. 2 key findings →
This review is one of the first to provide an overview of the available literature in relation to strategies used to improve the organisation of palliative care. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Palliative medicine·2015-09-09
Use of in-depth data, consensus methods and theoretical understanding of the intervention components produced an evidence-based intervention for further testing in end-of-life care in advanced dementia. 1 key finding →
Alterations in learning processes and the neural circuitry that supports fear conditioning and extinction represent mechanisms through which trauma exposure might influence risk for psychopathology. 2 key findings →
The combination of decreased amyloid β42 (Aβ42) and increased total tau proteins (T-Tau) and phosphorylated tau (P-Tau) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) has recently been considered as a biological diagnostic criterion of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 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.