Get help now — free helplines

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 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call 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) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed 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.

Find studies

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.

Mutation profile of APP, PSEN1, and PSEN2 in Chinese familial Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 2019-01-31

Causative mutations in the genes encoding amyloid precursor protein (APP), presenilin 1 (PSEN1), or presenilin 2 (PSEN2) account for a majority of cases of familial Alzheimer disease (FAD) inherited in an autosomal-dominant pattern. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Against combined Bielschowsky silver staining and immunohistochemistry histopathological scores, statistical parametric mapping had 96% sensitivity, 96% specificity, and 95% accuracy, whereas magnetic resonance-less CapAIBL standardized uptake value ratioWhole Cerebellum had 94% sensitivity, 96% specificity, and 95% accuracy. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Two-hundred and seventy-three subjects were included, 189 normal hearing and 84 subjective hearing loss subjects. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

We examined how methods used for identifying dementia in administrative claims affected dementia incidence across racial/ethnic populations using a 100% sample of Medicare beneficiaries (n = 23,793,452). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Plant iridoids such as catalpol and its 10-O-trans-p-coumaroyl derivative, geniposide, harpagoside, and loganin, and seco-iridoids, oleuropein and its aglycone and oleocanthal have been found to exhibit significant neuroprotective effect and the property of slowing down the process of neurogedeneration in AD and PD. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Pomegranate juice (PGJ) is rich in unique bioactive compounds that can be used in the management of various diseases/disorders such as cancer, heart disease, Alzheimer disease, hypertension, and diabetes. 3 key findings →

Participants: 28 Evidence: high

Age-related hearing loss and tinnitus, dementia risk, and auditory amplification outcomes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Ageing research reviews 2019-09-23

Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) or presbycusis, as the third leading cause of chronic disability in older adults, has been shown to be associated with predisposing cognitive impairment and dementia. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volumetric measures have become a standard tool for the detection of incipient Alzheimer's Disease (AD) dementia in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The results of the extended model show that social influence, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, and behavioral intention (BI) all had P P value for RC and TA was greater than .05, hence were insignificant. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Clinically, superimposed systemic inflammation generally has significant deleterious effects on the Alzheimer's disease (AD) progression. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Triggering receptor expressed in myeloid cells (TREM)2 is a genetic high-risk factor for sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD) and is considered a potential target for AD diagnosis and therapy, although its role in the different stages of AD remains controversial. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Crocus sativus L. natural compounds have been extensively used in traditional medicine for thousands of years. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

In vivo Prevalence of Alzheimer Biomarkers in Dementia with Lewy Bodies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders 2019-07-16

Neuropathological studies indicate concomitant Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 4 key findings →

Participants: 38 Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

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 tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed