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.

In this large cohort study of elderly subjects, the degree of dVRS appears independently associated with age, hypertension, volume of white matter hyperintensities, and lacunar infarctions. dVRS should be considered as another MRI marker of cerebral small vessel disease in the elderly with regional variations in their severity. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. New England Journal of Medicine 2010-01-27

This review of Alzheimer's disease assembles a variety of findings relevant to the mechanism of the disease and ties them together using the current understanding of the basis of the loss of cognition: the accumulation of misfolded proteins, which cause oxidative and inflammatory damage to the brain and, ultimately, synaptic dysfunction.

Hippocampal sections from five patients with Alzheimer's disease enrolled in the AN1792 Phase 2a trial were compared with those from 13 non-immunized Braak-stage and age-matched patients with Alzheimer's disease, and eight age-matched non-demented controls. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Diabetes, Alzheimer disease, and vascular dementia: a population-based neuropathologic study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Neurology 2010-08-25

Elderly patients with diabetes develop more extensive vascular pathology, which alone or together with AD-type pathology (particularly in APOE ε4 carriers) results in increased dementia risk. 2 key findings →

Participants: 553 Evidence: low

The safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of bapineuzumab (AAB-001), a humanized monoclonal antibody to amyloid beta, were evaluated in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease in a phase 1, randomized, third-party unblinded, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose trial. 2 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: high

Among caregivers, this small randomized controlled trial found that escitalopram use resulted in improvement in depression, resilience, burden and distress, and quality of life. 4 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high

Effect of an antioxidant drink on homocysteine levels in Alzheimer's patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Journal of the neurological sciences 2010-09-20

The regular ingestion of polyphenols contained in an antioxidant beverage may decrease tHcy plasmatic concentrations in Alzheimer's patients. 1 key finding →

Participants: 100 Evidence: high

Follow-up occurred during a mean period of 6.8 +/- 3.4 years, and subjects had a mean of 2.9 +/- 1.6 follow-up visits. 3 key findings →

Participants: 213 Evidence: low

Food combination and Alzheimer disease risk: a protective diet

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2010-04-12

Simultaneous consideration of previous knowledge regarding potentially AD-related nutrients and multiple food groups can aid in identifying food combinations that are associated with AD risk. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

The MoCA: well-suited screen for cognitive impairment in Parkinson disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Neurology 2010-11-01

Primary outcomes using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses showed that all 3 mental status tests produced excellent discrimination of PD-D from patients without dementia (area under the curve [AUC], 87%-91%) and PD-MCI from PD-N patients (AUC, 78%-90%), but the MoCA was generally better suited across both assessments. 1 key finding →

Participants: 114 Evidence: low

The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is insensitive to mild cognitive impairment and executive function. 2 key findings →

Participants: 493 Evidence: low

We examined longitudinal associations between the apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (ApoE4(+) status) and several cognitive outcomes and tested effect modification by sex. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 113 Evidence: moderate

A sensitive immunohistochemical method for phosphorylated alpha-synuclein was used to stain sets of sections of spinal cord and tissue from 41 different sites in the bodies of 92 subjects, including 23 normal elderly, 7 with incidental Lewy body disease (ILBD), 17 with Parkinson's disease (PD), 9 with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), 19 with Alzheimer's disease with Lewy bodies (ADLB) and 17 with Alzheimer's disease with no Lewy bodies (ADNLB). 5 key findings →

Participants: 92 Evidence: low

APOE epsilon4 genotype and longitudinal changes in cerebral blood flow in normal aging

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Archives of neurology 2010-01-01

Our findings suggest that APOE epsilon4-mediated risk for Alzheimer disease is associated with widespread decline in rCBF over time that precedes the onset of dementia. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Our genome-wide search of Caribbean Hispanic individuals identified several novel genetic variants associated with LOAD and replicated these associations in a white cohort. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate

The evidence of a preventive treatment effect aimed at vascular risk factors on cognitive decline and dementia in later life is scarce and mostly based on secondary outcome parameters. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

↑ 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