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 101–125 of 1,426 studies scoring ≤ 29 out of 100 (page 5 of 58)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
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.
Self-reported changes in physical and mental health by members are an important dimension by which the quality of a Medicare Advantage (MA) plan is rated by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. 4 key findings →
The mechanism of action of benzodiazepines is through the modulation of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), an inhibitory neurotransmitter that suppresses the central nervous system (CNS); the drugs have efficacy for short-term use (less than 1 month), but patients can develop a tolerance and dependence with long-term use.2 The benefits of benzodiazepines decrease over time and there are increased associated risks such as cognitive decline, accidental injuries, falls, and increased rates of hospital admissions and ED visits.2 Patients can also have paradoxical anxiety while on benzodiazepines.3 Studies have shown that long-term use of benzodiazepines increases the risk of dementia.4,5 Recent clinical practice guidelines recommend deprescribing benzodiazepines for older adults (age 65 years or older) for use in insomnia, and the American Geriatric Society (AGS) BEERs Criteria recommend avoidance of benzodiazepines in older adults because of the increased risk of adverse reactions such as falls and fractures.1,6 The AGS does say that benzodiazepines may be appropriate for use in older adults in certain circumstances such as ethanol withdrawal, and periprocedural anesthesia.6 The FDA has cautioned providers about prescribing benzodiazepines in patients using opioids but does not recommend withholding medications used for opioid use disorder in patients taking benzodiazepines.7,8 NPs can be instrumental in adequately treating anxiety and insomnia disorders with nonpharmacologic interventions (such as yoga and sleep hygiene) as well as with other medication classes that are not benzodiazepines. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100.·Innovation in Aging·2025-12-01
Recent studies indicate that having a billed AWV is associated with increases in preventive care services such as vaccinations, cancer screening, and dementia diagnosis. 1 key finding →
I’ll be applying soon. Claire: Maddie, what do you think will be different for you when you come to visits with us versus visits with an adult provider? 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100.·The Gerontologist·2017-10-20
As has been noted, Alzheimer’s and related dementias are underdiagnosed and when diagnoses are made, they are too often undisclosed by clinicians: studies suggest that fewer than half of individuals report being told of their diagnoses (Alzheimer’s Association, 2015). 5 key findings →
Neighborhood disadvantage was selectively associated with cognitive measures heavily influenced by executive function, namely using an efficient word generation strategy, and incorporating feedback to guide problem-solving. 5 key findings →
The dominant research paradigm for Alzheimer's disease has focused on amyloid-beta plaqueremoval for over three decades, producing no curative therapy despite billions of dollars ofinvestment. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100.·Revista Foco·2025-03-17
Este trabalho é uma revisão de literatura que explora a relação entre mecanismos epigenéticos e a Doença de Alzheimer (DA), uma doença neurodegenerativa caracterizada por perda de memória e dificuldades cognitivas. 5 key findings →
Apolipoprotein E-4 (APOE-4), serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4), and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of glucocerebrosidase (GBA) are some of the main altered genes in AD, PDD and DLB. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease is a neurological illness that impacts mental and emotional functions functions, has become a global concern due to its increasing prevalence. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100.·Kranion·2026-06-16
ResumenLa llegada de los anticuerpos monoclonales lecanemab y donanemab marca un cambio de paradigma en el tratamiento de la enfermedad de Alzheimer, transitando del nihilismo terapéutico a la era de las terapias modificadoras de la enfermedad. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer disease (AD) pathology affects the transentorhinal/entorhinal region early but whether entorhinal cortex (EC) astrocytes are causal drivers or therapeutic targets remains unresolved. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100.·Gene Expression·2025-12-18
Full or partial trisomy of human chromosome 21 results in dysregulation of gene expression, leading to the manifestation of specific phenotypes described in individuals with Down syndrome (DS). 3 key findings →
Canada’s Drug Agency (CDA-AMC) recommends that Leqembi be reimbursed by public drug plans for the treatment of adult patients in the early stages of Alzheimer disease (AD) (i.e., mild cognitive impairment [MCI] or mild dementia) who have evidence of amyloid in the brain and who are APOE epsilon 4 (APOE4) noncarriers or heterozygotes, if certain conditions are met. 5 key findings →
La carta al editor presenta recomendaciones actualizadas para el uso de donanemab en la enfermedad de Alzheimer (EA), basadas en su papel dentro de la hipótesis de la cascada amiloide. 5 key findings →
Anti-amyloid immunotherapy agents represent a novel and clinically significant class of humanized monoclonal antibodies designed to selectively bind and clear pathological amyloid-beta (Aβ) aggregates from the brain, thereby slowing the progression of early Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Mit der Einführung neuer Alzheimer-Therapien wie den Anti-Amyloid-Antikörpern Lecanemab und Donanemab rückt ein bislang wenig bekanntes, aber hochaktuelles Phänomen in den Fokus: ARIA – Amyloid-related Imaging Abnormalities. 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 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.