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 1,212 studies published 2019(page 31 of 49)· 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 44 out of 100.·Neuropsychology·2019-03-21
Intraindividual cognitive variability (IIV), a measure of within-person variability across cognitive measures at a single time point, is associated with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·PLoS ONE·2019-01-31
In China, the crude mortality from AD and other forms of dementia increased from 2009 to 2015, but the age-standardized mortality decreased. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·BMC research notes·2019-08-14
Multiple challenges were encountered in creating a sampling framework and contacting, recruiting and retaining care homes in the PACE study. 5 key findings →
A plethora of complex misfolded protein combinations have been found in Alzheimer disease (AD) brains besides the classical pathological hallmarks. 2 key findings →
Neurofilament light chain (NFL) has been recently introduced as a biomarker of early dementia. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET) is a proxy for regional hypometabolism in Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Medicine·2019-12-01
This study will provide evidences to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SMYZD in combination with GBEs in treatment of VaD, as well as the adjuvant role of SMYZD in combination. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia in the elderly and the sixth leading cause of death in the United States. 1 key finding →
Machine learning has become ubiquitous and a key technology on mining electronic health records (EHRs) for facilitating clinical research and practice. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Rand health quarterly·2019-05-16
No disease-modifying therapy is currently available for Alzheimer's disease, but therapies are in development, and one may become available in the near future. 1 key finding →
Variants in the gene encoding the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) are known to increase the risk of developing Alzheimer disease and Parkinson's disease (PD). 4 key findings →
Human and animal studies suggest that inflammation occurring outside the central nervous system (systemic inflammation) may play a key role in promoting neurodegeneration, Alzheimer's disease pathology, and cognitive decline in older adults. 4 key findings →
As our population ages, therapies increase, and the number of individuals living with advanced PD and related disorders grows, so too does the imperative to recognize and address the palliative care needs of such patients and families. 1 key finding →
The sleep-wake cycle regulates interstitial fluid (ISF) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of β-amyloid (Aβ) that accumulates in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
CSF-NEP was significantly inversely associated with CSF-Aβ42 and positively with the extent of neuronal injury as measured by CSF-tau and FDG-PET. 3 key findings →
The We and others have previously shown that polygenic risk score analysis (PRS) has considerable predictive utility for identifying those at high risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) with an area under the curve (AUC) of >0.8. 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.