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
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 12,901–12,925 of 17,923 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 517 of 717)· 31,380 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; 16,851 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.
This study consolidates evidence that commonly used signs and symptoms of dehydration lack even basic levels of diagnostic accuracy in older adults, implying that many who are dehydrated are not being identified, thus compromising their health and well-being. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·The Gerontologist·2017-11-01
Only one third (n = 10) of caregivers interviewed were prepared for the death, and the majority who were prepared were enrolled in hospice. 3 key findings →
Despite the increasing prevalence, growing costs, and high mortality of dementia in older adults in the U.S., little is known about the course of these diseases and what care dementia patients receive in their final years of life. 3 key findings →
Our findings reveal several different views on what is important about end-of-life care for people with dementia; therefore, a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to care is unlikely to be most appropriate. 3 key findings →
Research is needed with methodologically rigorous designs and theoretical frameworks that examine cognitive, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing ACP attitudes, preferences, and behaviors among PWDs in order to improve engagement among this population. 2 key findings →
Most importantly attributes included (1) knowing and recognizing the symptoms of decline in dementia and what dying looks like; (2) understanding emotions and grief responses; (3) accessing and appraising supports needed to manage and care for dying; (4) organizing affairs and completing tasks in advance; (5) accepting that losses are inevitable and imminent; (6) reflecting on caregiving and finding meaning, "a silver-lining"; and (7) closing, reconciling, and renewing relationship bonds and completing the family member's life. 5 key findings →
ABSTRACTBackground:Evidence concerning when and in which manner older people living in nursing homes (NHs) would prefer to discuss advance care planning (ACP) is still scarce. 2 key findings →
Accumulation of hyperphosphorylated tau directly correlates with cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease and other primary tauopathies. 5 key findings →
Here, we show that the dendrite lengths and spine densities are reduced significantly in hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons, but increased in spinal neurokinin-1-positive neurons in mice after SNI, indicating that the excitatory synaptic connectivity is reduced in hippocampus but enhanced in spinal dorsal horn in this neuropathic pain model. 3 key findings →
The monoamine hypothesis has been accepted as the most common hypothesis of major depressive disorder (MDD) for a long period because of its simplicity and understandability. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Biological psychiatry·2017-05-22
The findings suggest that adult neurogenesis is required to maintain hippocampal volume but is not responsible for stress-induced volume loss. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2017-12-27
The hippocampus is a highly stress susceptible structure and hippocampal abnormalities have been reported in a host of psychiatric disorders including major depression and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 5 key findings →
For women who initiate HT more than 10 or 20 years from menopause onset or are aged 60 years or older, the benefit-risk ratio appears less favorable because of the greater absolute risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and dementia. 4 key findings →
Cerebral small vessel disease (SVD) is commonly observed on neuroimaging among elderly individuals and is recognized as a major vascular contributor to dementia, cognitive decline, gait impairment, mood disturbance and stroke. 1 key finding →
Brain photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy using red to near-infrared (NIR) light is an innovative treatment for a wide range of neurological and psychological conditions. 1 key finding →
Small vessel diseases (SVDs) are a group of disorders that result from pathological alteration of the small blood vessels in the brain, including the small arteries, capillaries and veins. 1 key finding →
The critical role of the vasculature and its repair in neurological disease states is beginning to emerge particularly for stroke, dementia, epilepsy, Parkinson's disease, tumors and others. 3 key findings →
With increase in life expectancy, the number of persons suffering from common age-related brain diseases, including neurodegenerative (e.g., dementia) and cerebrovascular (e.g., stroke) disease is expected to rise substantially. 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%),
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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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.