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
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 10,151–10,175 of 10,183 studies scoring 50–69 out of 100 (page 407 of 408)· 31,380 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; 16,851 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 50 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2011-11-01
Amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation was evaluated with 2 [(11)C]Pittsburgh compound B (PiB) positron emission tomography scans about 2.5 years apart in 146 cognitively normal adults. 3 key findings →
In contrast, the cerebrovascular resistance index was significantly elevated in amyloid-positive versus amyloid-negative cases, with additional elevation in patients with Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
In this cross-sectional study, we found an association between Aβ brain burden measured in vivo and DBP and cortisol, indicating a possible link between these CVRF and Aβ burden measured by PiB-PET. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2013-08-15
In this study we compared Pittsburgh compound-B (PIB) positron emission tomography (PET) amyloid imaging, fluorodeoxyglucose PET for metabolism, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for structure to predict conversion from amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's dementia using data from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. 5 key findings →
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Alzheimer's disease are sometimes difficult to differentiate clinically because of overlapping symptoms. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100.·Scientific reports·2017-04-18
Atrophy patterns on MRI can reliably predict three neuropathological subtypes of Alzheimer's disease (AD): typical, limbic-predominant, or hippocampal-sparing. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100.·Annals of neurology·2010-08-01
In middle-aged community participants, we observed a significant inverse association of anthropometric and CT-based measurements of abdominal, especially visceral, fat with total brain volume. 4 key findings →
These results support a biphasic model of changes in AD, which could affect the selection of patients for clinical trials and the use of magnetic resonance imaging as a surrogate marker of disease modification. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease (PD) are the two most common neurodegenerative disorders, and are characterized by deposition of specific proteins in the brain. 2 key findings →
Research suggests that diet may play a role in AD, but it is inconclusive relative to which dietary approach provides the most neuroprotective effects. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is an age-related neurodegenerative disease that affects 50 million people worldwide, with 10 million new cases occurring each year. 5 key findings →
In 2011, a workgroup of the Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable introduced recommendations for detecting and monitoring amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. 5 key findings →
AI-derived MRI markers, particularly GM volume and MH burden, provide valuable predictors of cognitive response and ARIA risk in patients treated with lecanemab. 4 key findings →
Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies such as lecanemab are increasingly used to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD) and are associated with amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), including hemorrhagic findings (ARIA-H). 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
Randomized / 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
Multicenter 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%),
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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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.