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 139 studies published 1995(page 4 of 6)· 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·1995-03-01
We measured the activities of choline acetyltransferase (ChAT) in the post mortem frontal cortex in 32 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients with different apolipoprotein E (apoE) genotypes. 4 key findings →
Seven female patients with mild to moderate dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT) were treated with long-term, low-dose estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) over a period of 5-45 months. 4 key findings →
Formalin-fixed postmortem brain tissue from 14 HIV-infected adult patients, with previous repeated neurological and neuroradiological examinations, was studied by immunohistochemical and molecular biological methods. 4 key findings →
Among the elderly, the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease and multi-infarct dementia, as opposed to depression, increases steeply with age. 2 key findings →
Neurodegenerative processes in Alzheimer disease (AD) are thought to be driven in part by the deposition of amyloid beta (A beta), a 39- to 43-amino acid peptide product resulting from an alternative cleavage of amyloid precursor protein. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·JAMA·1995-05-01
Based on this study, type and degree of cognitive impairment are better predictors of driving skills than age or medical diagnosis per se. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·JAMA·1995-04-01
Evidence that dying occurs as a natural, final event in the wholeness of human life is culturally, artistically, and scientifically persuasive. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Nature·1995-09-01
The lin-12 and glp-1 genes of Caenorhabditis elegans are members of the lin-12/Notch family of receptors for intercellular signals that specify cell fate. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·1995-07-01
The brains of 46 control subjects and 21 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients were studied to determine whether there are age-related or AD-related changes in the vasoactive intestinal polypeptide (VIP) neuron population of the human suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN). 1 key finding →
The purpose of this study was to determine cerebral myo-inositol (mI) in adults with Down syndrome (DS), and to trace the chronobiology of DS to Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·1995-10-01
In this clinical study the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) level of a novel form of the beta-amyloid peptide (A beta) extending to position 42 (A beta 42) was determined in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) as well as controls. 2 key findings →
Amyloid beta-protein (A beta), the principal constituent of senile plaques seen in Alzheimer's disease (AD), is derived by proteolysis from the beta-amyloid precursor protein (beta PP). 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Neuropharmacology·1995-10-01
The data from the present study do not lend support to the idea that low affinity, open channel NMDA receptor blockers are also effective in models of epilepsy at doses having little effect on physiological processes. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·1995-09-01
The etiology of neurodegenerative diseases remains enigmatic; however, evidence for defects in energy metabolism, excitotoxicity, and for oxidative damage is increasingly compelling. 5 key findings →
As many as 45% to 80% of nursing home residents have pain that contributes materially to functional impairment and decreased quality of life. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Neurology·1995-01-01
The dominantly inherited ataxias comprise a series of clinical phenotypes that include ataxia, dysarthria, dysmetria, and intention tremor resulting from the involvement of the cerebellum and its afferent and efferent pathways. 5 key findings →
Fifty patients with liver cirrhosis underwent neurological, psychometric, electroencephalographic and biochemical examination as well as cranial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study the incidence of pallidal lesions in cirrhotics and their correlation to liver function, as well as to neurological and mental state. 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.