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 1,251–1,275 of 1,335 studies published 2020(page 51 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.
Deposition of hyperphosphorylated and aggregated tau protein in the central nervous system is characteristic of Alzheimer disease and other tauopathies. 4 key findings →
Our lab has recently shown that the Sigma-2 Receptor/Transmembrane Protein 97 (TMEM97) and Progesterone Receptor Membrane Component 1 (PGRMC1) form a complex with the Low Density Lipoprotein Receptor (LDLR), and this intact complex is required for efficient uptake of lipoproteins such as LDL and apolipoprotein E (apoE). 4 key findings →
This review summarises the most recent evidence regarding the effects of diet in preventing and reducing age-related cognitive decline and neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2020-07-03
Previous research has demonstrated beneficial impact of spermidine intake on memory functions in both animal models and humans, suggesting that spermidine may be a preventive approach to delay age-related cognitive decline and possibly even Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Accumulating evidence suggests that inflammation is a major contributor in the pathogenesis of several highly prevalent, but also rare, neurological diseases. 2 key findings →
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) encompasses a spectrum of clinical syndromes characterized by progressive executive, behavioural and language dysfunction. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·ACS sensors·2020-04-02
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative condition that affects a large number of elderly people worldwide and has a high social and economic impact. 2 key findings →
Retention intervals of at least three days were needed to evidence significant forgetting at both recognition and paired-associate recall test. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Cell·2020-07-22
Although complex inflammatory-like alterations are observed around the amyloid plaques of Alzheimer's disease (AD), little is known about the molecular changes and cellular interactions that characterize this response. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Cell·2020-11-13
To elucidate the role of Tau isoforms and post-translational modification (PTM) stoichiometry in Alzheimer's disease (AD), we generated a high-resolution quantitative proteomics map of 95 PTMs on multiple isoforms of Tau isolated from postmortem human tissue from 49 AD and 42 control subjects. 2 key findings →
We report a novel association between gut microbiota-related products and systemic inflammation with brain amyloidosis via endothelial dysfunction, suggesting that SCFAs and LPS represent candidate pathophysiologic links between the gut microbiota and AD pathology. 4 key findings →
The amyloid cascade hypothesis, according to which the self-assembly of amyloid-β peptide (Aβ) is a causative process in Alzheimer's disease, has driven many therapeutic efforts for the past 20 years. 1 key finding →
The termination of many clinical trials of amyloid-targeting therapies for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has had a major impact on the AD clinical research enterprise. 2 key findings →
Among the more promising treatments proposed for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease (PD) are those reducing brain insulin resistance. 1 key finding →
This review evaluates the novel strategy of treating Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease (AD and PD) withdrugs that initially have been developed to treat type 2 diabetes. 2 key findings →
Our results provide a clue for the hypothesis that autophagy enhancement and apoptosis inhibition may be involved in the effect of semaglutide to protect against Aβ 25-35 . 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Immunity·2020-01-07
Recent years have witnessed a revolution in our understanding of microglia biology, including their major role in the etiology and pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →
Anosmia, stroke, paralysis, cranial nerve deficits, encephalopathy, delirium, meningitis, and seizures are some of the neurological complications in patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) which is caused by acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov2). 5 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.