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 12,701–12,725 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 509 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.
In younger controls, SUV peak was observed in the temporal lobe with values of approximately 3.0 for 11 C-RO-963, 1.5 for 11 C-RO-643, and 3.5 for 18 F-RO-948. 5 key findings →
Although clinical routine focuses on dichotomous and visual interpretation of amyloid PET, regional image assessment in research settings may yield additional opportunities. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurology·2021-12-14
They also suggest that FW elevation occurs in the locus coeruleus to transentorhinal cortex tract, nucleus basalis of Meynert, and hippocampus in the transition from CN to EMCI, while other basal forebrain regions and the entorhinal cortex are not affected until a later stage of AD. 2 key findings →
These results show significant differences in neurogranin and total-tau between typical and atypical patients, which may relate to factors other than disease topography. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2020-12-29
Elevated microglial activation in the right amygdala-entorhinal-hippocampal complex of App NL-G-F mice is associated with better spatial learning. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurology·2020-06-26
We hypothesize the population without dementia can be subdivided into participants with and without biological Alzheimer disease (AD) based on the combination of CSF Aβ42 and p-tau/t-tau (represented also by the p-tau/t-tau/Aβ42 ratio). 5 key findings →
The progressive decrement of neuropsychological performance is associated with HVL long before the emergence of clinically overt symptoms. 4 key findings →
Our findings suggest AD-type tau is not higher in LLD compared to non-depressed, cognitively unimpaired older adults and appears unlikely to contribute to lower gray matter volume in LLD, further underscoring the need to distinguish major depressive disorder from depressive symptoms occurring in early AD. 5 key findings →
The blood-brain barrier (BBB) represents a considerable obstacle to brain entry of the majority of drugs and thus severely restricts the therapy of many serious CNS diseases including brain tumours, brain HIV, Alzheimer and other neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
The epsilon 4 allele of apolipoprotein E (apoE) is a major risk factor for Alzheimer disease, suggesting that apoE may directly influence neurons in the aging brain. 2 key findings →
Compelling evidence indicates that excess consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages plays an important role in the epidemic of obesity, a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes mellitus. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2003-02-01
Neither dietary, supplemental, nor total intake of carotenes and vitamins C and E was associated with a decreased risk of AD in this study. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2011-12-01
Some genes contribute to AD pathogenesis in both white and African American cohorts, although it is unclear whether the causal variants are the same. 3 key findings →
ABCA1, a cholesterol transporter expressed in the brain, has been shown recently to be required to maintain normal apoE levels and lipidation in the central nervous system. 4 key findings →
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is associated with apolipoprotein E (APOE gene, apoE protein) polymorphism: current evidence suggests that the epsilon4 allele is a risk factor for the development of CAA and the epsilon2 allele predisposes to hemorrhage. 3 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.