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 76–100 of 125 studies published 1994(page 4 of 5)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
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.
Groups of patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease, multiple system atrophy, and progressive supranuclear palsy or Steele-Richardson-Olszewski syndrome, matched for overall clinical disability, were compared using three computerised cognitive tests previously shown to be sensitive to frontal lobe dysfunction. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Nature·1994-04-01
The 37-amino-acid polypeptide amylin is the principal constituent of the amyloid deposits that form in the islets of Langerhans in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus, but its role in the pathogenesis of this disease is unresolved. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Neurology·1994-06-01
Five patients developed a stereotyped syndrome of progressive akinesia of gait, speech, and hand-writing without rigidity, tremor, or dementia. 3 key findings →
Meningeal blood vessels were studied in Alzheimer disease (AD) and control brain specimens obtained from autopsies within 16 hours after death. 4 key findings →
We describe a clinico-pathological variant of a degenerative disorder involving Broca's, Wernicke's, and supplementary motor areas, which presented as primary progressive aphasia, dysarthria, bucco-facial apraxia, and hearing loss as initial symptoms, followed by organic personality changes. 4 key findings →
The findings show high rates of new onset dementia, increasing markedly with age, and suggest rapid acceleration of one or more processes that is common in advanced age. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Neurology·1994-11-01
We present the preliminary neuropathologic criteria for progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) as proposed at a workshop held at the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, April 24 and 25, 1993. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Neurology·1994-06-01
Previous work suggested a deficiency in the terminal complex of the mitochondrial electron transport chain, cytochrome c oxidase (COX), in platelet mitochondria of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 1 key finding →
Thirty patients with dementia defined by DSM-III-R criteria (Alzheimer's disease (22), vascular dementia (3), Parkinson's disease, frontal lobe dementia, possible diffuse Lewy body dementia, normal pressure hydrocephalus and uncertain diagnosis), with scores below 24 points in the Mini-Mental Status Examination and more than 4 years of education were submitted to a neuropsychological evaluation. 4 key findings →
The frequency of the epsilon 4 allele of the apolipoprotein E (apoE) is increased in familial and sporadic late-onset Alzheimer's disease, but its prevalence in non-Alzheimer dementias in Caucasian populations is unknown. 1 key finding →
Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses were used to compare age-related changes in adaptive functioning in institutionalized adults with and without Down syndrome. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer disease (AD) is characterized by deposits of an aggregated 42-amino-acid beta-amyloid peptide (beta AP) in the brain and cerebrovasculature. 3 key findings →
The stability of proteins that constitute the neurofibrillary tangles and senile plaques of Alzheimer disease suggests that they would be ideal substrates for nonenzymatic glycation, a process that occurs over long times, even at normal levels of glucose, ultimately resulting in the formation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Psychosomatics·1994-05-01
The authors critically reviewed 26 international and American outcome studies that assessed the effect of psychiatric comorbidity on length of stay for medical/surgical inpatients. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Epilepsia·1994-01-01
Functional and structural neuroimaging techniques are increasingly indispensable in the evaluation of epileptic patients for localization of the epileptic area as well as for understanding pathophysiology, propagation, and neurochemical correlates of chronic epilepsy. 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 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.