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
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 101–125 of 585 studies published 2008(page 5 of 24)· 27,780 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; 13,259 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 60 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2008-08-01
We used a sensitive and specific beta-site amyloid precursor protein (APP)-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) assay to determine the relationship between BACE1 activity in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and markers of APP metabolism and axonal degeneration in early and late stages of Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.·Brain·2008-02-07
Interestingly, we found no consistent differences in learning and memory performance between high versus low PiB cognitively normal or amnestic MCI subjects. 5 key findings →
The presence of burst suppression, which was unexpectedly high in this medical intensive care unit population, was an independent predictor of increased risk of death at 6 months. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2008-10-28
Odor identification deficits occur in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and predict clinical conversion from MCI to AD. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2008-05-23
We investigated in a population-based cohort study the association of global and lobar brain tissue volumes with specific cognitive domains and risk of dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.·Psychology and aging·2008-03-01
Using 12-year longitudinal data from deceased participants of the Berlin Aging Study (N = 414; age 70-103 years, at first occasion; M = 87 years, SD = 8.13), the authors examined whether and how old and very old individuals exhibit terminal decline in reported life satisfaction at the end of life. 2 key findings →
Standardized automated analysis of (18)F-FDG PET scans may provide an objective and sensitive support to the clinical diagnosis in early dementia. 1 key finding →
The effectiveness and safety of yokukansan (TJ-54), a traditional Japanese medicine (kampo) for the treatment of the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), were evaluated in 106 patients diagnosed as having Alzheimer's disease (AD) (including mixed-type dementia) or dementia with Lewy bodies. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.·Academic radiology·2008-09-01
Rationale and objectives Mild cognitive impairment has been regarded as a pre-Alzheimer condition, but some patients do not develop dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Neuroepidemiology·2008-02-07
Strengths of the study are that the subjects were randomly selected from a defined population, the majority of the subjects were examined in person, and MCI was defined using published criteria. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2008-07-01
Older patients with a college education who present with complaints of cognitive decline (reported by themselves or others) and score less than 27 on the MMSE are at a greater risk of being diagnosed with dementia and should be referred for a comprehensive dementia evaluation, including formal neuropsychological testing. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Journal of neurology·2008-01-22
Using established clinical diagnostic standards for dementia the overall rate on routine outpatient neurological care is 28.6%, but using more sensitive neuropsychological measures, rates for cognitive impairment might be up to 2-fold higher. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2008-08-01
Optimal ranges of CDR-SOB scores corresponding to the global CDR scores were 0.5 to 4.0 for a global score of 0.5, 4.5 to 9.0 for a global score of 1.0, 9.5 to 15.5 for a global score of 2.0, and 16.0 to 18.0 for a global score of 3.0. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Diabetes care·2008-10-22
The observed relation between high triglycerides, diabetes, and vascular dementia emphasizes the need for detection and treatment of vascular risk factors in older individuals in order to prevent the likelihood of clinical dementia. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.·Nature medicine·2008-04-06
Fourteen years after transplantation into the striatum of an individual with Parkinson's disease, grafted nigral neurons were found to have Lewy body-like inclusions that stained positively for alpha-synuclein and ubiquitin and to have reduced immunostaining for dopamine transporter. 2 key findings →
To design clinical trials for the frontotemporal lobar degenerations (FTLD), knowledge about measurement of disease progression is needed to estimate power and enable the choice of optimal outcome measures. 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%),
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.