Get help now — free helplines

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 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call 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) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed 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.

Find studies

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.

The Impact of Store-Based online Fulfilment on Grocery Retail Food Waste: An Empirical Analysis

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 15 out of 100. Not indexed 2026

Problem Definition: Grocery retailers increasingly fulfil online orders from existing stores rather than from dark stores (dedicated warehouses/fulfilment centers). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Medicare and Medicaid provide health coverage to millions of Americans, including older adults, people with disabilities, low-income families, children, and individuals with complex medical and social needs. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Understanding emergency department staff needs and perceptions in the provision of palliative care

⚠ Regulatory decision — not a study alzhub usefulness score 15 out of 100. Emergency medicine Australasia : EMA 2014-04-08

Our study suggests that although ED staff expressed confidence regarding symptom management in palliative care, they lacked understanding of the patients in whom a palliative approach could be applied and sought further education in areas, such as end-of-life communication and ethical issues. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neuron tau-targeting biomimetic nanoparticles for curcumin delivery to delay progression of Alzheimer's disease

⚠ Retracted — do not rely on it alzhub usefulness score 15 out of 100. Journal of nanobiotechnology 2020-05-13

Intravenous neuronal tau-targeted T807-modified novel biomimetic nanosystems are a promising clinical candidate for the treatment of AD. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

FDA Converts Novel Alzheimer's Disease Treatment to Traditional Approval

⚠ Regulatory decision — not a study alzhub usefulness score 14 out of 100. U.S. Food and Drug Administration 2023-07-06

The FDA converted lecanemab (Leqembi) from accelerated to full traditional approval after the Phase 3 Clarity AD trial (1,795 patients) confirmed it slowed cognitive decline, making it the first amyloid-targeting antibody to reach full approval for Alzheimer's. The drug carries a boxed warning for ARIA, brain swelling or bleeding that is usually detected on routine MRI and is more common in people with two copies of the ApoE ε4 gene or those on blood thinners. 3 key findings →

Design: regulatory decision Evidence: moderate

Choice of Received Long-Term Care – Individual Responses to Regional Nursing Home Provisions

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 13 out of 100. Not indexed 2015

Existing literature analyzing the choice of received long-term care by frail elderly (65 years) predominantly focuses on physical and psychological conditions of elderly people as factors that influence the decision for a particular type of care. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Pericyte loss influences Alzheimer-like neurodegeneration in mice

⚠ Retracted — do not rely on it alzhub usefulness score 13 out of 100. Nature communications 2013-01-01

Pericytes are cells in the blood-brain barrier that degenerate in Alzheimer's disease (AD), a neurological disorder associated with neurovascular dysfunction, abnormal elevation of amyloid β-peptide (Aβ), tau pathology and neuronal loss. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Following an anonymous 2021 whistleblower petition to the FDA alleging manipulated research underlying the Alzheimer's drug simufilam, PLOS ONE conducted its own investigation and retracted five papers co-authored by Hoau-Yan Wang, some of them co-authored with a Cassava Sciences executive, after finding that background patterns in blot images appeared 'more similar than would be expected for data obtained in independent experiments.' 5 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

The Impact of Self-Store Image Congruency on Consumer Engagement and Store Attachment in the Grocery Retail Sector in Kuwait

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 12 out of 100. Not indexed 2023

This study aims to test a model that investigates the impact of self-store image congruency on the in-store shopping experience in the context of grocery retail setting, which in turn, explain and predict different facets of consumer behavior, including consumer satisfaction, consumer engagement, and store attachment. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

CircNF1-419 improves the gut microbiome structure and function in AD-like mice

⚠ Retracted — do not rely on it alzhub usefulness score 12 out of 100. Aging 2020-01-06

Our pre-experiments found that the brain circRNA sequence profiles and gut microbiota in AD-like mice were changed, as circNF1-419 could enhance autophagy to ameliorate senile dementia in AD-like mice, so we conclude that there might some connections between circRNA and gut microbiome. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Biogen to Realign Resources for Alzheimer's Disease Franchise (Aduhelm discontinuation)

⚠ Press release — not a study alzhub usefulness score 11 out of 100. Biogen Inc. press release 2024-01-31

On January 31, 2024, Biogen announced it would discontinue development and sales of Aduhelm (aducanumab) and end the mandatory post-approval ENVISION confirmatory trial, redirecting resources to lecanemab (Leqembi) and other pipeline drugs, including two tau-targeting compounds (BIIB080, BIIB113). 3 key findings →

Design: company announcement

CMS's national policy covers FDA-approved anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies (such as lecanemab and donanemab) for Medicare patients with a documented diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or mild Alzheimer's dementia and confirmed amyloid pathology, under a framework called 'Coverage with Evidence Development.' 3 key findings →

Design: coverage determination

Integrative genomics identifies APOE ε4 effectors in Alzheimer's disease

⚠ Retracted — do not rely on it alzhub usefulness score 10 out of 100. Nature 2013-07-24

Late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) risk is strongly influenced by genetic factors such as the presence of the apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (referred to here as APOE4), as well as non-genetic determinants including ageing. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

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 tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed