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 701–725 of 1,356 studies published 2021(page 29 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2021-12-05
Synaptic dysfunctions precede cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease by decades, affect executive functions, and can be detected by quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG). 4 key findings →
Compared to cognitively normal subjects, AD-spectrum patients (i.e., EMCI, LMCI, and AD) showed a reversing trend toward an association between CSF pathological markers and the abnormal SRN occurring during the progression of AD. 3 key findings →
33 Chinese- and 117 English-speaking older adults who received a diagnosis of normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment at consensus were included in the data analysis. 5 key findings →
Down syndrome (DS), trisomy of human chromosome 21 (HSA21), is characterized by lifelong cognitive impairments and the development of the neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
There were significant associations (p < 0.05) between the NPI variables (total score, Affective factor) and entorhinal and precuneus tau across all participants. 5 key findings →
Compared to healthy control subjects with no cognitive deficits, altered cerebellar FC were observed in early PD participants with both motor and cognitive deficits, but not in PD patients with normal cognition, nor elderly subjects showing signs of a cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Classification of MCI and HC displayed highest accuracy based on diffusion MRI, which besides demonstrated high correlation with clinical scores. 5 key findings →
Research on caregiver identity in the context of memory impairment has focused primarily on more advanced stages of the cognitive impairment trajectory (e.g., dementia caregivers), failing to capture the complex dynamics of early caregiver identity development (e.g., MCI; mild cognitive impairment caregivers). 5 key findings →
Circumstances of death, symptoms, and treatment appeared to be similar between YOD and LOD, except that persons with LOD had significantly more somatic comorbidities and were admitted to hospital in the last three months of life more often than persons with LOD. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100.·PLoS ONE·2021-07-09
Alzheimer's disease (AD), non-AD dementia, and Parkinson's disease (PD) are increasingly common in older adults, yet all risk factors for their onset are not fully understood. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurology·2021-12-14
They also suggest that FW elevation occurs in the locus coeruleus to transentorhinal cortex tract, nucleus basalis of Meynert, and hippocampus in the transition from CN to EMCI, while other basal forebrain regions and the entorhinal cortex are not affected until a later stage of AD. 2 key findings →
Several studies, including genome wide association studies (GWAS), have strongly suggested a central role for the ATP-binding cassette transporter subfamily A member 7 (ABCA7) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurology·2021-11-03
Reproductive history events signaling more estrogen exposure such as premenopausal status, longer reproductive span, higher number of children, and use of HT and HC were associated with larger GMV in women in midlife. 4 key findings →
Recent trials of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have reported encouraging results for improving or stabilizing cognition in patients diagnosed with Alzheimer dementia. 5 key findings →
Increased life expectancy combined with the aging baby boomer generation has resulted in an unprecedented global expansion of the elderly population. 1 key finding →
These data suggest that older adults in rural communities may be underdiagnosed with ADRD, and/or diagnosed at later stages of dementia. 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 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.