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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 11,151–11,175 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 447 of 1086)· 28,180 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; 13,658 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.·BMC neurology·2022-06-03
The MMSE score, MoCA score, serum miR-27a-3p level, cerebrospinal fluid miR-27a-3p, Aβ42 levels and Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio of AD patients in mild group and moderate-to-severe group were all lower than those in the control group, and the moderate-to-severe group were lower than the mild group (all P < 0.05);the serum NEAT1 level, SUVR, and cerebrospinal fluid NEAT1 and BACE1 levels were higher than those in the control group, and the moderate-to-severe group were higher than the mild group (all P < 0.05). 1 key finding →
The techniques and data herein introduce a system for modeling neuronal vulnerability in response to factors in the human brain and provide insights into proteins potentially contributing to AD pathogenesis. 3 key findings →
Plasma Aβ40, Aβ42, and P-Tau proteins in the NC, aMCI, and AD groups increased with the progression of AD ( P < 0.01); cortical thickness reductions in the AD-aMCI groups and AD-NC groups mainly involved the bilateral superior temporal gyrus, transverse temporal gyrus, superior marginal gyrus, insula, right entorhinal cortex, right fusiform gyrus, and cingulate gyrus. 1 key finding →
CSF biomarkers may improve the accuracy of the modified Boston criteria with altered profile in 85% of the patients fulfilling revised Boston criteria for probable CAA. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100.·Science advances·2021-09-24
Quantifying physical differences of protein aggregates implicated in Alzheimer’s disease (AD), in blood, could provide crucial information on disease stages. 1 key finding →
Cognitive impairment and altered CSF biomarker concentrations indicative of AD pathology can predict increased mortality in patients with an AHF, and so probably even before clinical dementia diagnosis by early biomarker analysis; a notion that may have substantial clinical implications by improving perioperative treatment and postoperative rehabilitation. 3 key findings →
Most genetic studies concerning risk genes in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are from Caucasian populations, whereas the data remain limited in the Chinese population. 4 key findings →
Only Aβ burden measured by PET, but not markers of neuroinflammation, differed among cognitively unimpaired elderly with different APOE ε4 gene dose. 3 key findings →
We believe this is the first study to investigate associations between blood metabolites and neocortical amyloid burden (NAB) in the search for a blood-based biomarker for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
The General Practitioner Assessment of Cognition (GPCOG) consists of cognitive test items and historical questions asked of an informant. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100.·BMC Neurology·2025-11-24
Overall, 392 patients were enrolled in HARMONY; 49 patients with PDD and 27 patients with DLB were included in the open-label safety analysis, of whom 46 met response criteria and were randomized to receive pimavanserin (n = 22) or placebo (n = 24) during the double-blind period. 4 key findings →
BackgroundSeveral monoclonal antibodies designed to slow cognitive and functional decline in individuals with early Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been recently approved. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·1987-08-01
HLA-DR is a class II cell surface glycoprotein of the human histocompatibility complex usually expressed on the surface of cells that are simultaneously presenting foreign antigen to T-lymphocytes. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100.·Biomedicines·2019-12-09
: Despite all scientific efforts and many protracted and expensive clinical trials, no new drug has been approved by FDA for treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD) since 2003. 5 key findings →
It has been well documented that neurotrophins, including brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), are severely affected in Alzheimer's disease (AD), but their administration faces a myriad of technical challenges. 4 key findings →
Doublecortin (DCX) is a microtubule-associated protein expressed by migrating neuroblasts and is considered to be a reliable marker of neurogenesis. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100.·JAMA neurology·2016-12-01
Diagnostic change occurred in 46 patients (79%) having both a previous diagnosis of AD and an amyloid-negative scan (P Conclusions and relevance Amyloid PET in addition to routine assessment in patients with cognitive impairment has a significant effect on diagnosis, diagnostic confidence, and drug treatment. 4 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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.