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 306 studies published 2000(page 4 of 13)· 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.
Thyroid status was measured at baseline (1990-93), through assessment of serum antibodies to thyroid peroxidase (TPO-Abs, positive: >10 IU/ml), serum TSH levels, and when TSH was abnormal ( 4.0 mU/l), serum thyroxin levels (T4). 4 key findings →
Amyloid plaques are a neuropathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD), but their relationship to neurodegeneration and dementia remains controversial.
The aim of this prospective cohort study was to identify the risk factors involved in falls in 190 elderly residents of two geriatric centres in Granada (Andalusia, Spain). 3 key findings →
The average total cost to Medicare of persons with a claims-based diagnosis of AD was $6021 versus $2310 (P < .001) for persons without a diagnosis. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-02-08
The volume of the hippocampal formation predicted performance on most acquisition and recall measures across the spectrum of normal aging and AD. 3 key findings →
Patients with anti-Ta (also called anti-Ma2) antibodies were young men with testicular tumours (100%), frequent hypothalamic involvement (70%) and a poor neurological outcome. 5 key findings →
In a longitudinal study in which all participants were healthy at the time of their entry into the study, the present authors compared the amount of decline on the subtests of the WISC-R to determine the sequence of cognitive decline associated with varying stages of dementia. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-04-01
The authors recruited 83 patients with PD and 50 controls, all without dementia at initial assessment, and assessed them at regular intervals over a maximum period of 122 months. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2000-03-01
Registration of serial MRI volume images provides a powerful method of quantification of brain atrophy that can be used to monitor progression of AD in clinical trials. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Nature genetics·2000-07-01
Polycystic lipomembranous osteodysplasia with sclerosing leukoencephalopathy (PLOSL; MIM 221770), also known as Nasu-Hakola disease, is a recessively inherited disease characterized by a combination of psychotic symptoms rapidly progressing to presenile dementia and bone cysts restricted to wrists and ankles. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.·Nature genetics·2000-07-01
Ageing of the brain leads to impairments in cognitive and motor skills, and is the major risk factor for several common neurological disorders such as Alzheimer disease (AD) and Parkinson disease (PD). 4 key findings →
Endocytosis is critical to the function and fate of molecules important to Alzheimer's disease (AD) etiology, including the beta protein precursor (betaPP), amyloid beta (Abeta) peptide, and apolipoprotein E (ApoE). 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Clinical therapeutics·2000-07-01
The results of this study suggest that naftidrofuryl is effective and well tolerated in treating the symptoms of vascular and mixed dementia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-06-01
The double dissociation in performance on semantic memory and attention/executive function clearly separated the temporal and frontal variants of FTD and aids the early differentiation of FTD from AD. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100.·Neurology·2000-08-22
Rates of hippocampal atrophy match both baseline cognitive status and the change in cognitive status over time in elderly persons who lie along the cognitive continuum from normal to MCI to AD.
This is the first demonstration in the United Kingdom that the mortality of patients with dementia who are fed by gastrostomy is considerable. 3 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.