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 451 studies published 2004(page 4 of 19)· 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.
This systematic review of the literature focuses on the influence of ethnic, cultural, and geographic factors on the caregivers of patients with dementia. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Neuron·2004-11-01
Parkinson's disease (PD; OMIM #168600) is the second most common neurodegenerative disorder in the Western world and presents as a progressive movement disorder. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Nature genetics·2004-03-21
Inclusion body myopathy associated with Paget disease of bone and frontotemporal dementia (IBMPFD) is a dominant progressive disorder that maps to chromosome 9p21.1-p12. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2004-09-01
The term frontotemporal dementia (FTD) encompasses a range of clinical syndromes that are believed not to map reliably onto the spectrum of recognized pathologies. 2 key findings →
Recent functional imaging studies have revealed coactivation in a distributed network of cortical regions that characterizes the resting state, or default mode, of the human brain.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Neurology·2004-03-01
These data support distinct processes in the initiation and progression of AD pathology within the temporal cortex: Deposition of Abeta reaches a "ceiling" early in the disease process, whereas NFT formation, synaptic loss, and gliosis continue throughout the course of the illness. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Neurology·2004-06-01
The APOE-4 allele increases risk and decreases age at onset of PD, an association that may not be dependent upon cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
The concept of cognitive impairment intervening between normal ageing and very early dementia has been in the literature for many years. 1 key finding →
Because the IQCODE provides information complementary to brief cognitive tests, harnessing them together can improve screening accuracy. 1 key finding →
Existing evidence regarding diagnostic disclosure in dementia is both inconsistent and limited with the perspectives of people with dementia being largely neglected. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.·Age and ageing·2004-05-01
The results from this study provide information about a group void in the literature pertaining to activity restriction from fear of falling - community-based seniors receiving home care services. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2004-12-01
Family history of dementia was associated with an increased risk of dementia and AD in this very old population, but only among APOE epsilon4 carriers. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2004-01-01
Patients with MCI had a predominant memory impairment with relative sparing of other cognitive domains and were intermediate between clinically normal individuals and patients with AD on cognitive and functional ratings. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2004-11-01
In contrast to observations in individuals not treated with CART, we found no relationship between CSF markers and neurological status in this CART-using cohort with advanced HIV/AIDS. 2 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.