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 51–75 of 306 studies published 2000(page 3 of 13)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
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 59 out of 100.·JAMA·2000-03-01
In this study, levels of total A(beta)x-40 and A(beta)x-42 were elevated early in dementia and levels of both peptides were strongly correlated with cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Nature·2000-12-01
Vaccinations with amyloid-beta peptide (A beta) can dramatically reduce amyloid deposition in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
This study evaluated efficacy and safety of donepezil hydrochloride (donepezil) at 5 mg/day in patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease for 24 weeks in a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparative trial. 4 key findings →
Apolipoprotein E (apoE) is a polymorphic gene involved in lipid metabolism with three common variant alleles (epsilon2, epsilon3, and epsilon4). 5 key findings →
Accurate and automated methods for measuring the thickness of human cerebral cortex could provide powerful tools for diagnosing and studying a variety of neurodegenerative and psychiatric disorders.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-05-01
CLBs detected by alpha-synuclein antibodies in patients with PD are a more sensitive and specific correlate of dementia than the presence of Alzheimer's pathology, which was present in a minority of the cases in this series. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-03-01
Incidence rates of all dementias and of AD increased with age; men and those with lesser education had higher rates of possible/incipient dementia (CDR = 0.5) in this community. 5 key findings →
Memory complaints in elderly people should no longer be considered merely as an innocent age-related phenomenon or a symptom of depression. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-08-01
Of 173 patients followed for at least 1 year, 50 became demented according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, revised 3rd edition (DSM III-R) criteria (mean follow-up, 3.6 +/- 2. 2 years). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Nature genetics·2000-07-01
Autosomal recessive juvenile parkinsonism (AR-JP), one of the most common familial forms of Parkinson disease, is characterized by selective dopaminergic neural cell death and the absence of the Lewy body, a cytoplasmic inclusion body consisting of aggregates of abnormally accumulated proteins. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Nature genetics·2000-08-01
Neurofibrillary tangles (NFT) composed of the microtubule-associated protein tau are prominent in Alzheimer disease (AD), Pick disease, progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and corticobasal degeneration (CBD). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2000-01-01
The cortical anatomy of 6 patients with semantic dementia (the temporal lobe variant of frontotemporal dementia) was contrasted with that of a group of age-matched normal subjects by using voxel-based morphometry, a technique that identifies changes in gray matter volume on a voxel-by-voxel basis. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-03-01
The study formed part of the Rotterdam Study, a prospective, population-based cohort study on the frequency, etiology, and prognosis of chronic diseases. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2000-06-01
This paper describes the steps involved in voxel-based morphometry (VBM), a technique that involves a voxel-wise comparison of the local concentration of gray matter between two groups of subjects. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2000-01-01
Mean plasma Abeta40 levels were higher in the AD group than in controls (P = .005), but there was substantial overlap; Abeta42 levels were similar between the groups. 4 key findings →
We describe demographic, clinical, laboratory and aetiological findings in 93 consecutive patients with rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behaviour disorder (RBD), which consists of excessive motor activity during dreaming in association with loss of skeletal muscle atonia of REM sleep. 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.