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 751–775 of 1,102 studies published 2018(page 31 of 45)· 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.
Environmental factors such as chemicals, stress and pathogens are now widely believed to play important roles in the onset of some brain diseases, as they are associated with neuronal impairment and acute or chronic inflammation. 1 key finding →
Moderate wine intake, at 1⁻2 glasses per day as part of the Mediterranean diet, has been positively associated with human health promotion, disease prevention, and disease prognosis. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Nutrients·2018-05-04
Alzheimer’s disease (AD), characterized by cognitive decline and devastating neurodegeneration, is the most common age-related dementia. 5 key findings →
The present study explores the role of cognitive reserve, executive functions, and working memory (WM) span, as factors that might explain training outcomes in cognitive status. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Life science alliance·2018-05-16
Frontotemporal dementia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients with C9orf72 mutation show cytoplasmic poly-GR and poly-PR aggregates. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·BMC geriatrics·2018-08-16
ACP is facilitated by an open relationship based on trust between the GP, the person with dementia and his/her family caregiver, in which both medical and non-medical issues are addressed. 1 key finding →
Frailty and sarcopenia have recently gained considerable attention in terms of preventive care in Japan, which has an ever-increasing aging population. 5 key findings →
The findings indicate that healthcare professionals experienced several structural barriers that prevented the provision of palliative care to people with severe dementia in long-term care facilities. 2 key findings →
The Integrated Memory Care Clinic (IMCC) is a patient-centered medical home as defined by the National Committee for Quality Assurance directed by advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) caring for persons living with dementia (PLWD); physicians provide specialty consultation but do not direct care or care planning. 1 key finding →
In this study, we found an early warning score algorithm focused on deterioration prevention did not account for long-term management or palliative care trajectories. 2 key findings →
Accumulating evidence suggests that brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is associated with the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Cell transplantation·2018-09-25
Cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) is composed of several diseases affecting the small arteries, arterioles, venules, and capillaries of the brain, and refers to several pathological processes and etiologies. 5 key findings →
N -acetylcysteine (NAC), which is an acetylated cysteine compound, has aroused scientific interest for decades due to its important medical applications. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·BMC neuroscience·2018-10-17
Efficient blood supply to the brain is of paramount importance to its normal functioning and improper blood flow can result in potentially devastating neurological consequences. 1 key finding →
An accurate and early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important to select optimal patient care and is critical in current clinical trials targeting core AD neuropathological features. 5 key findings →
These findings indicate that galantamine could be a promising treatment to improve endotoxin-induced cognitive decline and neuroinflammation in neurodegenerative diseases. 3 key findings →
Following the development of the first methods to measure the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers total-tau (T-tau), phosphorylated tau (P-tau) and the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-β (Aβ42), there has been an enormous expansion of this scientific research area. 5 key findings →
Subcortical small-vessel disease (SSVD) is a disorder well characterized from the clinical, imaging, and neuropathological viewpoints. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·BMC neuroscience·2018-07-28
App NL/NL and App NL-G-F/NL-G-F mice exhibit behavioral changes associated with non-cognitive, emotional domains before the onset of definitive cognitive deficits. 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 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.