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 501–525 of 642 studies published 2011(page 21 of 26)· 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.
Braak's staging concept of Lewy body disease pathogenesis is based on a spatiotemporal sequence of alpha-synuclein deposition, with autonomic nervous system involvement before synucleinopathy in substantia nigra neurons. 5 key findings →
Random effects results suggest that caregiver burden weakens the inverse relationship between health utilities and institutional service use, leading to greater likelihood of institutional use than would be expected at a given level of health. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Nursing older people·2011-10-26
IT WAS the 'gradual realisation' that what he had been taught about dementiain his nurse and social work training was simply 'not helpful' that prompted Colm Cunningham's interest in dementia research, he says. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100.·Parkinson's disease·2011-02-07
Patients at late stage Parkinson's disease (PD) develop several motor and nonmotor complications, which dramatically impair their quality of life. 5 key findings →
This study compared FDG-PET and clinical measurements in elderly subjects with memory disturbance to examine relationships between glucose metabolism and cognitive or functional scores. 3 key findings →
CSF biomarker studies were performed in 6 patients each with tremor-dominant (TD) and non-tremor-dominant (NT) Parkinson disease (PD) patients, 27 Alzheimer disease (AD) and 17 age-matched controls. 2 key findings →
Recent demonstrations that the secretion, uptake, and interneuronal transfer of tau can be modulated by disease-associated tau modifications suggest that secretion may be an important element in tau-induced neurodegeneration. 2 key findings →
Neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in Alzheimer disease and related tauopathies are composed of insoluble hyperphosphorylated Tau protein, but the mechanisms underlying the conversion of highly soluble Tau into insoluble NFTs remain elusive. 1 key finding →
The microtubule-associated protein Tau plays a critical role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease and several related disorders (tauopathies). 3 key findings →
Among the pathologic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) neurodegeneration, only synaptic loss in the brains of AD patients closely correlates with the degree of dementia in vivo. 1 key finding →
Progranulin haploinsufficiency is a common cause of familial frontotemporal dementia (FTD), but the role of progranulin in the brain is poorly understood. 2 key findings →
Mounting evidence suggests that amyloid beta-induced impairments in synaptic plasticity that is accompanied by cognitive decline and dementia represent key pathogenic steps of Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Molecular bioSystems·2011-03-24
The incidence of Alzheimer disease (AD) and diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasing at an alarming rate and has become a major public health concern worldwide. 5 key findings →
Tauopathies, characterized by neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) of phosphorylated tau proteins, are a group of neurodegenerative diseases, including frontotemporal dementia and both sporadic and familial Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Although clinically distinct diseases, tauopathies and synucleinopathies share a common genesis and mechanisms, leading to overlapping degenerative changes within neurons. 5 key findings →
Representing the most common cause of dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) has dramatically impacted the neurological and economic health of our society. 1 key finding →
Tauopathies, including Alzheimer's disease, are a group of neurodegenerative diseases characterized by abnormal tau hyperphosphorylation that leads to formation of neurofibrillary tangles. 2 key findings →
Neurofibrillary tangles are a feature of Alzheimer disease and other tauopathies, and although they are generally believed to be markers of neuronal pathology, there is little evidence evaluating whether tangles directly impact neuronal function. 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.