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 676–700 of 1,356 studies published 2021(page 28 of 55)· 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.
This review should serve as a compendium of updated information on VaD and provide guidance in terms of newer diagnostic and potential therapeutic approaches. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Autophagy·2021-08-19
Primary dysfunction of autophagy due to Mendelian defects affecting core components of the autophagy machinery or closely related proteins have recently emerged as an important cause of genetic disease. 4 key findings →
Emerging evidence indicates that impaired mitophagy-mediated clearance of defective mitochondria is a critical event in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia, yet there is no cure or diagnostics available prior to the onset of clinical symptoms. 4 key findings →
Microglia are active modulators of Alzheimer's disease but their role in relation to amyloid plaques and synaptic changes due to rising amyloid beta is unclear. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Neurology·2021-02-16
We selected 57 patients with LBD (dementia with Lewy bodies [DLB], n = 38; Parkinson disease dementia [PDD], n = 19) with available AD CSF biomarkers and neuropsychological data. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Neurology·2021-01-29
We examined 54 volunteers (mean age 70.0 years, 56% women, 51% APOE ɛ4 carriers) with the translocator protein (TSPO) tracer [ 11 C]PBR28 to assess neuroinflammation and with [ 11 C] Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) to assess cerebral Aβ accumulation. [ 11 C]PBR28 and [ 11 C]PiB standardized uptake value ratios (SUVRs) were quantified in 6 regions of interests by using the cerebellar cortex as a pseudo-reference and reference region, respectively. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Stroke·2021-12-15
We review the implications of the recently approved aducanumab amyloid-β immunotherapy for treating Alzheimer disease with comorbid cerebral amyloid angiopathy. 3 key findings →
Subtype and Stage Inference (SuStaIn) is an unsupervised learning algorithm that uniquely enables the identification of subgroups of individuals with distinct pseudo-temporal disease progression patterns from cross-sectional datasets. 4 key findings →
Brain iron accumulation has been found to accelerate disease progression in amyloid-β(Aβ) positive Alzheimer patients, though the mechanism is still unknown. 4 key findings →
This mass spectrometry-based plasma biomarker test: has strong diagnostic performance; can accurately distinguish brain amyloid positive from amyloid negative individuals; may aid in the diagnostic evaluation process for Alzheimer's disease; and may enhance the efficiency of enrolling participants into Alzheimer's disease drug trials. 1 key finding →
In a population of cognitively unimpaired adults with increased risk of AD, long-term exposure to air pollution was associated with higher levels in biomarkers of AD pathology. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Nature·2021-10-06
The neocortex is disproportionately expanded in human compared with mouse 1,2 , both in its total volume relative to subcortical structures and in the proportion occupied by supragranular layers composed of neurons that selectively make connections within the neocortex and with other telencephalic structures. 2 key findings →
Neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a marker of brain atrophy and predictor of disease progression in rare diseases such as Huntington Disease, but also in more common neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Among diagnostic groups, highest plasma Nfl and t-tau concentrations were detected in CJD (fold changes of 38 and 18, respectively, compared to HC). 5 key findings →
Plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a marker of neuronal damage in different neurological disorders and might predict disease progression in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 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 27,380 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.