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
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 7,151–7,175 of 15,839 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 287 of 634)· 28,580 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; 14,058 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.
A multitiered strategy was adopted to assess tau conformational changes within fibrillar lesions during the progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Increasing evidence suggests that free radical-mediated oxidation of biological substrates is a key feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. 2 key findings →
Data support the evidence that neuropsychological rehabilitation is effective in Alzheimer disease (AD), to strengthen the pharmacological treatment to delay the progression of dementia. 1 key finding →
Endocytic system dysfunction is one of the earliest disturbances that occur in Alzheimer's disease (AD), and may underlie the selective vulnerability of cholinergic basal forebrain (CBF) neurons during the progression of dementia. 3 key findings →
The past decade has shed new light on the etiology of Alzheimer's disease (AD), which is the consequence of interactions between numerous lesions. 1 key finding →
The extracellular accumulation of amyloid-beta (Abeta) in neuritic plaques is one of the characteristic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), a progressive dementing neurodegenerative disorder of the elderly. 4 key findings →
Prior work has shown that iron interacts with hyperphosphorylated tau, which contributes to the formation of neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in Alzheimer's disease (AD), whereas iron chelator desferrioxamine (DFO) slows down the clinical progression of the cognitive decline associated with this disease. 4 key findings →
A change of the prion protein conformation results in a class of neurodegenerative diseases called the transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (like mad cow and Creutzfeld-Jakob diseases). 4 key findings →
Active immunization with the human amyloid peptide (Abeta42) or passive immunization with anti-Abeta42 antibodies protects mice that express a mutant human amyloid precursor protein (APP) transgene from cerebral amyloid deposits. 4 key findings →
The amyloid-beta (Aβ) peptide is the derivative of amyloid precursor protein (APP) generated through sequential proteolytic processing by β- and γ-secretases. 4 key findings →
Previous studies have demonstrated that amyloid precursor protein (APP) can bind and reduce Cu(II) to Cu(I), leading to oxidative modification of APP. 4 key findings →
beta-Amyloid peptides (Abeta) that form the senile plaques of Alzheimer disease consist mainly of 40- and 42-amino acid (Abeta 40 and Abeta 42) peptides generated from the cleavage of the amyloid precursor protein (APP). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neuroreport·2011-08-01
Murine transgenic models of Alzheimer's disease (Tg-AD) have been useful to analyze the contribution of β-amyloid precursor protein (βAPP), Aβ42 peptide deposition, and the proinflammatory mechanisms that characterize Alzheimer-type neuropathology. 4 key findings →
Neurodegenerative processes in Alzheimer disease (AD) are thought to be driven in part by the deposition of amyloid beta (A beta), a 39- to 43-amino acid peptide product resulting from an alternative cleavage of amyloid precursor protein. 4 key findings →
Pharmacological modulation of the GABA(A) receptor has gained increasing attention as a potential treatment for central processes affected in Alzheimer disease (AD), including neuronal survival and cognition. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·EMBO reports·2008-07-25
We have recently identified a new form of post-translational regulation of BACE1 (beta-site amyloid precursor protein (APP)-cleaving enzyme 1), a membrane protein that acts as the rate-limiting enzyme in the generation of the Alzheimer disease amyloid beta-peptide (Abeta). 4 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%),
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 (3.6% 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.