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
28,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 6,526–6,550 of 16,065 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 262 of 643)· 28,980 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; 14,457 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.
Oral infection with F. nucleatum could contribute to abnormalities in cognitive ability and pathological change in the brain of AD-like rats, which may be related to abnormal gut microbiota composition. 2 key findings →
There is increasing evidence of the relationship between sleep and neurodegeneration, but this knowledge is not incorporated into clinical practice yet. 2 key findings →
HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) is a term used to describe a variety of neurological impairments observed in HIV-infected individuals. 5 key findings →
Our findings highlight the potential of serum NfL as a useful surrogate end point of disease severity in upcoming targeted treatments. 3 key findings →
In view of the paucity of data on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers in Chinese patients, we evaluated the validity of tau, phosphorylated tau 181 (p-tau-181), amyloid β 42 (Aβ42), and Aβ40 proteins in Chinese patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Stroke·1996-11-01
Dysfunction of the blood-brain barrier is more prominent in white-matter lesions seen in ischemic CVD than in AD and may have a role in the pathogenesis of cerebrovascular white-matter lesions. 3 key findings →
In summary, high (11)C-Pittsburgh Compound B positron emission tomography retention significantly correlates with both fibrillar β-amyloid and losses of neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subtypes at autopsy, suggesting a closer involvement of β-amyloid pathology with neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subtypes than with inflammatory processes. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Neuroreport·1997-12-01
We measured tau concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples taken during the lifetime of 43 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and correlated these values with neurofibrillary tangle (NFT) scores as well as glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) expression as a marker of astrocytosis in the brain post-mortem. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is increasingly prevalent worldwide, and disease-modifying treatments may soon be at hand; hence, now, more than ever, there is a need to develop techniques that allow earlier and more secure diagnosis. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Stroke·1997-07-01
The pathological alterations in Binswanger's diseased brains include regressive changes in the astroglia and activation of the microglia with a decrease in the oligodendroglia, which were associated with the degradation of both myelin and axonal components. 5 key findings →
HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) affect up to 50 % of HIV-infected adults, independently predict HIV morbidity/mortality, and are associated with neuronal damage and monocyte activation. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2021-02-24
We conclude that reducing ApoE4 levels should be explored further as a therapeutic approach for APOE4 carriers with tauopathy including Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·European neurology·2001-01-01
To gain insight of the underlying mechanisms of astroglial response to Alzheimer's disease (AD), the level of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from controls and AD subjects were immunochemically determined, and the correlation between that level and dementia severity of AD patients was evaluated. 3 key findings →
Astrocytes are one of the brain's major cell types and are responsible for maintaining neuronal homeostasis via regulating the extracellular environment, providing metabolic support, and modulating synaptic activity. 5 key findings →
Altered concentrations of two out of three MMPs investigated in this study suggest that this family of biomolecules may play a role in the AD pathophysiology. 3 key findings →
There is an association between plasma GFAP and regional 18F-SMBT-1 PET, and this association appears to be dependent on brain Aβ load. 3 key findings →
Our findings suggest that VILIP-1 may play a role in the AD pathophysiology and is a good candidate for dynamic biomarker of AD, although this issue requires further investigation. 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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%),
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.
1,038 records (3.6% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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.