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.

Understanding dementia beliefs among Vietnamese people is crucial for the development of evidence-based interventions to promote positive help-seeking behaviors when facing the risk of dementia for themselves and their relatives. 3 key findings →

Participants: 300 Evidence: low

BackgroundAlzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) affect nearly half of assisted living (AL) residents, the majority of whom have palliative care (PC) needs at the end of life (EOL). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

This Journal is not only a new publication but also the culmination of a shared vision and a timely response to one of the most significant demographic shifts in human history: the rapid aging of the South Asian population. 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

Endolysosomal dysfunction has been increasingly implicated in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

The behavioural and mental health needs of people with PWS result from the interactions between biological vulnerabilities associated with having PWS and living in a changing and demanding environment. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Chicago ZIP Code-Linked Area Deprivation Index as a Predictor of Dementia Diagnosis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. University of Chicago 2026-06-04

Dementia risk is influenced by biological and lifestyle factors as well as broader socioeconomic conditions; however, the extent to which socioeconomic deprivation creates structural exposures that affect cognitive aging remains unclear. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Geographical differences in Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) prevalence may be driven by under-diagnosis due to insufficient healthcare access. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Anemia and iron deficiency are common in older adults, yet their relevance to blood biomarkers for Alzheimer disease (AD) remains underappreciated. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Biomarkører for Alzheimers sykdom – et fremskritt for hvem?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 2026-05-12

12.05.2026: Debatt - En enkel blodprøve kan nå påvise fosforylert tau-protein 217 (p-tau217) – et biologisk tegn på Alzheimers sykdom, som kan være til stede mange år før de første symptomene viser seg. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Blood Phosphorylated Tau for the Diagnosis of Alzheimer Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Clinical Chemistry 2026-04-21

Alzheimer disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia globally and is defined by the presence of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles formed by the accumulation of phosphorylated tau (p-tau). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Synthetic images were visually consistent, producing plausible negative and positive patterns while preserving continuity in the sagittal plane. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer disease (AD) destroys brain cells and the patient’s memory is lost as a result of a progressive and incurable neurodegenerative disease. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

The pathological activation of AD microglia significantly amplifies endogenous aging characteristics. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

HIIT alone and in combination with CBD treatment significantly improved cognitive impairment induced by AD. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Vascular dementia (VaD), a primary cognitive disorder caused by cerebrovascular pathology, features significant white matter damage from chronic cerebral hypoperfusion strongly correlated with cognitive decline. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Tauopathies are a group of neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease, frontotemporal dementia, and progressive supranuclear palsy, characterized by the pathological accumulation of tau protein. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Six key themes were identified: Inadequate preparation, guidance and access to appropriate resources; Taboo and misunderstanding: talking about death; Dementia as a terminal illness and the role of palliative care; Key time points, critical events and decisions; Planning ahead not in reality; Family issues and dynamics. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

In conclusion, while differing in healthcare infrastructure, China, Japan, and South Korea converge in anchoring dementia care within the community. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

A 77-year-old woman with mild cognitive impairment was referred to 18F-florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET) to assess the indication of a disease-modifying drug against Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Alzheimer Disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by amyloid-β deposition, tau pathology, synaptic dysfunction, neuronal injury and cerebral atrophy. 1 key finding →

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