Get help now — free helplines

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 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call 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) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed 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.

Find studies

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.

Neuroticism, a personality trait characterized by the predisposition to experience intense and frequent negative emotions, has been associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 5 key findings →

Participants: 1,277 Evidence: low

Comparator supplement patterns qualify the clinical interpretation of an EHR-derived glucosamine signal in Alzheimer’s disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-07-27

Electronic health records linked documented glucosamine use to faster progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and poorer survival after dementia. 2 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

Associations of lifestyle factors and genetic risk with risk and rate advancement periods of dementia

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. PsyArXiv 2026-07-23

INTRODUCTIONLittle is understood about the extent to which lifestyle factors can advance or delay the risk of developing dementia, and whether that is dependent on non-modifiable factors, e.g. sex and genetic susceptibility.METHODSAmong 224,516 UK Biobank participants aged ≥50 years at baseline, Cox regression examined the relations of apolipoprotein E gene (APOE) genotypes, and lifestyle with incident dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Exploration of the molecular origins of sex-specific and temporal comorbidity patterns in dementia: insights from the Austrian claims data

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-07-16

Dementia is a progressive condition that impairs cognitive processes such as memory, decision-making, and the ability to manage daily activities. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

The effects of nicotine on neurocognitive outcomes: evidence from a polygenic risk score analysis

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2025-12-02

Our findings demonstrate differential effects of nicotine on AD risk and smoking intensity on white matter integrity, requiring triangulation with complementary methodological approaches to better inform potential long-term risks of nicotine intake on neurocognitive outcomes. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 334,757 Evidence: moderate

High-content imaging of live microglia-containing Alzheimer’s disease brain organoids

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-10-27

This method establishes a platform for high-throughput longitudinal drug screening in immunocompetent human COs that will enable the identification of new therapeutic candidates to modulate Aβ aggregation, glial reactivity, and neurodegeneration. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Beyond reduced alpha power: a weaker temporal link between alpha and other brain rhythms in Alzheimer’s disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-10-26

At the group level, the resting alpha abnormality in AD comprises two partly nonredundant dimensions: reduced expression and a weaker temporal link between alpha and subsequent multi-rhythm activity. 1 key finding →

Participants: 36 Evidence: low

Pantethine and Neurodegeneration: A Coenzyme A-Centered Framework Linking Metabolism, Neuroinflammation, and Mitochondrial Dysfunction

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-10-23

Neurodegenerative diseases are a growing global health burden associated with aging and characterized by progressive neuronal dysfunction, metabolic failure, mitochondrial impairment, oxidative stress, and chronic neuroinflammation. 1 key finding →

Design: narrative review Evidence: low

Maternal microbiome-dependent programming of neuroimmune and metabolic pathways during early development may critically shape sex-specific susceptibility to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) later in life. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

GPR6 Protects Medial Entorhinal Cortex in 5×FAD Mice from Early Pathology in Alzheimer’s Disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-10-22

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is characterized by progressive memory decline, with the medial entorhinal cortex (MEC) representing an early vulnerable hub for spatial cognition. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Stimulating microglial neuroinflammation with amyloid-beta oligomers compatible with solid-state NMR structural characterization

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-10-20

Soluble amyloid-β (Aβ) oligomers are considered the primary neurotoxic species in Alzheimer’s disease, yet the relationship between oligomer structure and biological activity remains poorly understood. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, in which epitranscriptomic modifications, especially RNA methylation, may exert crucial regulatory effects. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

We define an astrocyte–microglia axis in which astrocytic sEH limits EET availability and thereby sustains microglial STING signaling. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Protective or Pathogenic? Microglial Responses at the Intersection of Amyloid-β, Tau, and Neuroinflammation in Alzheimer’s Disease

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-10-20

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation, pathological tau aggregation, and neuronal loss. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Change in gut microbiome precedes symptomatic Alzheimer’s disease and is correlated with amyloid-beta accumulation in the brain

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-10-19

Early Ap accumulation is associated with distinct gut microbial signatures and reduced neuroactive metabolic potential, identifying targets for potential preclinical AD intervention. 3 key findings →

Participants: 101 Evidence: low

Insulin fails to mitigate amyloid pathology but modulates intestinal morphology in the 5xFAD model revealed by synchrotron-based XPCT

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-10-16

Intranasal insulin has been investigated as a metabolic intervention in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), but its effects across the brain–gut axis remain unclear. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

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 tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed