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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 9,526–9,550 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 382 of 1086)· 28,180 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; 13,658 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.
We provide the first evidence for the capability of a high-resolution positron emission tomographic (PET) imaging system in quantitatively mapping amyloid accumulation in living amyloid precursor protein transgenic (Tg) mice. 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive and intellectual deficits and behavior disturbance. 2 key findings →
The two main findings of this paper are (i) the posterior default mode network fails before measurable amyloid plaques and appears to initiate a connectivity cascade that continues throughout the disease spectrum; and (ii) high connectivity between the posterior default mode network and hubs of high connectivity (many located in the frontal lobe) is associated with amyloid accumulation. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2014-10-01
Total intracranial volume (TIV/ICV) is an important covariate for volumetric analyses of the brain and brain regions, especially in the study of neurodegenerative diseases, where it can provide a proxy of maximum pre-morbid brain volume. 3 key findings →
A novel MRI method--diffusion tensor imaging--was used to compare the integrity of several white matter fibre tracts in patients with probable Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Apoptotic nerve cell death is implicated in the pathogenesis of several devastating neurodegenerative conditions, including glaucoma and Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. 5 key findings →
Caregivers and neurologists considered incremental clinical benefit over SOC and safety to be highly desirable qualities for a new drug that could clear amyloid plaques and delay clinical progression and indicated a willingness to accept incremental ARIA-E to achieve additional clinical benefits. 2 key findings →
Type 2 diabetes mellitus and Alzheimer's disease are both associated with increasing age, and each increases the risk of development of the other. 2 key findings →
Use of cholinesterase inhibitors is associated with increased rates of syncope, bradycardia, pacemaker insertion, and hip fracture in older adults with dementia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Nature medicine·2017-05-01
We directly assessed mesial temporal activity using intracranial foramen ovale electrodes in two patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) without a history or EEG evidence of seizures. 3 key findings →
The findings confirm that the non-cognitive features of Alzheimer's disease are stressful for carers and indicate specific relationships between mood-related and behavioural signs of depression, walking and sleep disruptions and hallucinations in patients and adverse carer outcomes. 2 key findings →
The objective of this study was to assess the convergent validity of a 26-point Telephone Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in a longitudinal cohort of 46 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 1 key finding →
The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and incidence of the most frequent chronic health problems in relation to age in people with intellectual disabilities living in residential facilities in the Netherlands. 2 key findings →
The overall relationships between hearing loss and memory systems were predicted by the ease of language understanding model (J. Rönnberg, 2003), but the exact mechanisms of episodic memory decline in hearing aid users (i.e., mismatch/disuse, attentional resources, or information degradation) remain open for further experiments. 2 key findings →
Study objective We seek to determine how delirium and dementia affect the accuracy of the presenting illness and discharge instruction comprehension in older emergency department (ED) patients. 5 key findings →
Further detailed investigations into the development and treatment of comorbidities across the lifespan are needed for a successful longitudinal approach to healthcare in people with Down syndrome. 2 key findings →
We report for the first time an association between altered BA profile, genetic variants implicated in AD, and cognitive changes in disease using a large multicenter study. 3 key findings →
The authors investigated the hypothesis that exposure to pesticides could be related to central nervous system disorders in a prospective cohort study of 1,507 French elderly (1992-1998). 1 key finding →
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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.