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
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 7,051–7,075 of 17,283 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 283 of 692)· 30,580 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; 16,054 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.
Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to investigate volumes of different brain structures in 19 patients with late-onset major depression (DSM-III-R), 27 patients with Alzheimer's disease (NINCDS-ADRDA criteria) and 13 age matched controls. 3-D MRI sequences were acquired using a Siemens 1.5 T scanner. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100.·Stroke·2010-07-01
We found differential region-specific associations between degenerative and vascular processes and the structural integrity of the CC across the spectrum of cognitive ability. 5 key findings →
We investigated whether previously reported differences between Alzheimer's disease and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) in resting occipital activity lead to activation differences within functionally specialized visual cortical areas and deactivation differences in the default network. 2 key findings →
Antidepressants have modest efficacy in late-life depression (LLD), perhaps because various neurobiologic processes compromise frontolimbic networks required for antidepressant response. 2 key findings →
The relationship between the presence and severity of AIDS dementia complex (ADC) and the levels of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) RNA in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) were assessed. 2 key findings →
Impairment in instrumental activities of daily living appears to be a relatively independent dimension of health status that is related to depressive symptoms, particularly anxiety and depressive ideation as well as retardation and weight loss. 5 key findings →
While providing home care for a family member with senile dementia is clearly extremely stressful, there has been little controlled research assessing the specific effects of this stress on caregiver psychological, social, and health functioning. 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia and is a significant public health problem that will intensify as the population ages. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100.·The Gerontologist·2001-10-01
Significant differences emerged between spouse and adult-child caregiver groups as a whole and as a function of Clinical Dementia Rating impairment level. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100.·Brain research·1999-10-01
The precursor of the non-Abeta-component of Alzheimer's disease (AD) amyloid (NACP, alpha-synuclein) aggregates into insoluble filaments of Lewy bodies (LBs) in Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia with LBs (DLB). 2 key findings →
The neuronal ceroid-lipofuscinoses (NCLs) are inherited lysosomal storage diseases and constitute the most common group of children's progressive encephalopathies. 5 key findings →
The FDA advisory was associated with decreases in the use of atypical antipsychotics, especially among elderly patients with dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·1987-01-01
The antigenic profile of neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) in Alzheimer's disease (AD), senile dementia of Alzheimer type (SDAT), progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and in non-demented aged humans was investigated by light and electron microscopic immunocytochemistry using antisera and monoclonal antibodies to tubulin, microtubule-associated proteins (MAP1, MAP2 and tau), neurofilament proteins and determinants unique to Alzheimer paired helical filaments (PHF). 1 key finding →
This review traces evidence that age-related dementia (Alzheimer's disease) results from the destructive impact of the pulse on cerebral vasculature. 2 key findings →
In both Alzheimer and vascular dementia subtypes, the prevalence rates did not differ between men and women, but increased with age and were higher in subjects with a low level of education. 2 key findings →
We review the changing conceptions of schizophrenia over the past 50 years as it became understood as a disorder of brain function and structure in which neurocognitive dysfunction was identified at different illness phases. 2 key findings →
The purpose of this study was to explore the phenomenon of dementia caregiving in an ethnically diverse group of Latino caregivers, with the goal of identifying cultural influences on the caregiving experience. 5 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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%),
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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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.