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 551–575 of 646 studies published 2011(page 23 of 26)· 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 36 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2011-12-01
Hippocampal atrophy is a biomarker of initial cognitive decline in PD, including impaired memory encoding and storage, suggesting heterogeneity in the neural substrate of memory impairment. 3 key findings →
The mechanisms involved in Alzheimer's disease are not completely understood and how glial cells contribute to this neurodegenerative disease remains to be elucidated. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Biochemistry·2011-09-30
The amyloid β-peptide (Aβ), strongly implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), is produced from the amyloid β-protein precursor (APP) through consecutive proteolysis by β- and γ-secretases. 5 key findings →
We performed unbiased analysis of steroid-related compounds to identify novel Alzheimer's disease (AD) plasma biomarkers using liquid chromatography-atmospheric pressure chemical ionization-mass spectroscopy. 5 key findings →
The delivery of many potentially therapeutic and diagnostic compounds to specific areas of the brain is restricted by brain barriers, of which the most well known are the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and the blood-cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) barrier. 2 key findings →
In recent genome-wide association studies, the extracellular chaperone protein, clusterin, has been identified as a newly-discovered risk factor in Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer's disease (AD), the leading cause of dementia worldwide, is characterized by the accumulation of the β-amyloid peptide (Aβ) within the brain along with hyperphosphorylated and cleaved forms of the microtubule-associated protein tau. 1 key finding →
Monoclonal antibodies have therapeutic potential for treating diseases of the central nervous system, but their accumulation in the brain is limited by the blood-brain barrier (BBB). 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common neurodegenerative disorder, is a growing public health problem and still lacks effective treatments. 3 key findings →
The importance of micronutrients in health and nutrition is undisputable, and among them, zinc is an essential element whose significance to health is increasingly appreciated and whose deficiency may play an important role in the appearance of diseases. 2 key findings →
Epigenetic modifications represent mechanisms by which cells may effectively translate multiple signaling inputs into phenotypic outputs. 1 key finding →
Although beta-amyloid (Aβ) deposition is a characteristic feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD), this pathology is commonly found in elderly normal controls (NC). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2011-08-03
Using resting state (RS) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), the connectivity patterns of the default mode (DMN), frontoparietal, executive, and salience networks were explored in 13 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, 12 amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) patients, and 13 healthy controls. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2011-08-16
While resting state functional connectivity has been shown to decrease in patients with mild and/or moderate Alzheimer's disease, it is not yet known how functional connectivity changes in patients as the disease progresses. 2 key findings →
This review focuses on resting-state functional connectivity, a functional MRI technique which allows the study of spontaneous brain activity generated under resting conditions. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2011-10-04
Many machine learning and pattern classification methods have been applied to the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and its prodromal stage, i.e., mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 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 27,780 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.