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 851–875 of 1,097 studies published 2023(page 35 of 44)· 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.
While neither blood glucose nor serum insulin level was significantly altered in the experimental or control group, we found that injection of S961 but not buffer solution significantly increased intraocular pressure at 14 and 24 days after first injection, along with reduced porosity and aquaporin 4 expression in the trabecular meshwork, and increased tumor necrosis factor α and aquaporin 4 expression in the ciliary body. 4 key findings →
Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) allows the non-invasive direct observation of the central nervous system, enabling the measurement and extraction of biomarkers from neural tissue that can be helpful in the assessment of ocular, systemic and Neurological Disorders (ND). 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder impacting cognition, function, and behavior in the elderly population. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Cell·2023-09-19
Recent Aβ-immunotherapy trials have yielded the first clear evidence that removing aggregated Aβ from the brains of symptomatic patients can slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Over the past 30 years, the majority of (pre)clinical efforts to find an effective therapy for Alzheimer's disease (AD) focused on clearing the β-amyloid peptide (Aβ) from the brain since, according to the amyloid cascade hypothesis, the peptide was (and it is still considered by many) the pathogenic determinant of this neurodegenerative disorder. 3 key findings →
On July 6, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved lecanemab (Leqembi) for the treatment of Alzheimer's dementia (AD) patients. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) has witnessed a gradual rise in its prevalence in recent decades, particularly impacting a substantial segment of individuals aged 85 and above. 1 key finding →
Lecanemab, an anti-amyloid antibody with effects on biomarker and clinical endpoints in early Alzheimer's Disease (AD), was granted accelerated approval by the FDA in 2023 and regulatory review in Europe is ongoing. 5 key findings →
After the CLARITY-AD clinical trial results of lecanemab were interpreted as positive, and supporting the amyloid hypothesis, the drug received accelerated Food and Drug Administration approval. 2 key findings →
The increase in blood flow evoked by whisker stimulation (functional hyperemia) or by endothelial and smooth muscle vasoactivity was markedly attenuated in WT → Tg2576 chimeras but was fully restored in CD36-/- → Tg2576 chimeras, in which BAM ROS production was suppressed. 5 key findings →
Clinicians specialized in the diagnosis and management of persons living with early-stage Alzheimer's disease need to enable access, for those meeting criteria, to the new class of disease modifying drugs (DMDs). 1 key finding →
Tauopathies are heterogeneous clinicopathological entities characterized by abnormal neuronal and/or glial inclusions of the microtubule-binding protein tau. 5 key findings →
Tauopathies are clinicopathological entities with increased and pathological deposition in glia and/or neurons of hyperphosphorylated aggregates of the microtubule-binding protein tau. 5 key findings →
With the growth of the aging population, more age-related diseases endanger the health of the elderly, and therefore more research attention has been put on Alzheimer's disease and dementia. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Cells·2023-09-12
Increasing evidence implicates decreased energy metabolism and mitochondrial dysfunctions among the earliest pathogenic events of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Semaglutide, one of the most potent glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 analogs, has widely been used to treat type II diabetes mellitus and obesity. 2 key findings →
The therapeutic benefits of the incretin hormone, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1), for people with type 2 diabetes and/or obesity, are now firmly established. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Aging cell·2023-03-20
To help ensure an expanded healthy lifespan for as many people as possible worldwide, there is a need to prevent or manage a number of prevalent chronic diseases directly and indirectly closely related to aging, including diabetes and obesity. 5 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.