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 1,201–1,225 of 1,335 studies published 2020(page 49 of 54)· 27,380 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; 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.
Insurmountable evidence has demonstrated a strong association between Alzheimer's disease (AD) and cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), along with various other cerebrovascular diseases. 2 key findings →
While prevailing evidence supports that the amyloid cascade hypothesis is a key component of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology, many recent studies indicate that the vascular system is also a major contributor to disease progression. 1 key finding →
Perlecan is a heparan sulfate proteoglycan protein in the extracellular matrix that structurally and biochemically supports the cerebrovasculature by dynamically responding to changes in cerebral blood flow. 1 key finding →
Through a number of an extensive autopsy, biomarker, and genomics studies, researchers have recently defined a novel type of dementia known as limbic-predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy (LATE). 1 key finding →
Recently, a consensus working group provided new terminology for a common disease entity, limbic predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy (LATE), and its neuropathological substrate (LATE-NC). 3 key findings →
TAR DNA binding protein (TDP-43) is a DNA/RNA binding protein whose pathological role in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontal temporal lobe dementia (FTLD) via formation of protein aggregates is well established. 4 key findings →
This review considers whether the Braak hypothesis on protein propagation could account for prion disease, particularly Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). 5 key findings →
Since the discovery of TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) in 1995, our understanding of its role continues to expand as research progresses. 2 key findings →
Dendrites and dendritic spines are dynamic structures with pivotal roles in brain connectivity and have been recognized as the locus of long-term synaptic plasticity related to cognitive processes such as learning and memory. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease characterized by neurological dysfunction, including memory impairment, attributed to the accumulation of amyloid β (Aβ) in the brain. 5 key findings →
Actin-depolymerization factor (ADF)/cofilin, a family of actin-binding proteins, are critical for the regulation of actin reorganization in response to various signals. 2 key findings →
We found a beginning synaptic impairment (LTP deficit) at 3-4 months in the prefrontal cortex of AppNL-G-F mice that is further aggravated and extended to the hippocampus at 6-8 months. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·FEBS open bio·2020-01-30
Synaptic dysfunction has been implicated as an early cause of cognitive decline in neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by Aβ-driven synaptic dysfunction in the early phases of pathogenesis. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia, most prevalent in the elderly population and has a significant impact on individuals and their family as well as the health care system and the economy. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100.·Redox biology·2020-03-09
Sex differences in diseases involving oxidative and proteolytic stress are common, including greater ischemic heart disease, Parkinson disease and stroke in men, and greater Alzheimer disease in women. 4 key findings →
Protein homeostasis or proteostasis is an essential balance of cellular protein levels mediated through an extensive network of biochemical pathways that regulate different steps of the protein quality control, from the synthesis to the degradation. 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.