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.

Functional neuroimaging as a tool to understand social determinants of health in cognitive aging and ADRD: a scoping review

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. PsyArXiv 2026-10-20

The social, structural, and physical conditions in which individuals live, work, and age, collectively termed social determinants of health (SDOH), are associated with risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) changes how the brain’s electrical activity behaves, and these changes can, in principle, be picked up directly from a resting-state EEG recording without any invasive testing. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are highly prevalent in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), conceptualized as an intermediate clinical state between normal aging and dementia. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

NeuroMark dFNC: Transferable Dynamic-State Templates for Subject-Specific and Frequency-Resolved Chronnectomics

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-10-17

Dynamic functional network connectivity (dFNC) commonly identifies recurring connectivity states from resting-state fMRI, but states derived independently in each dataset lack guaranteed correspondence across studies and cannot be directly estimated in new participants. 5 key findings →

Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: moderate

Normative transcriptomic clues to thalamic developmental vulnerability in C9orf7 2-FTLD

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-10-13

This study investigated volumetric MRI differences of the thalamic nuclei in asymptomatic young adult C9orf72 expansion carriers compared to non-carriers, and examined spatial associations with normative thalamic transcriptomics from 8 weeks post-conception through middle age. 3 key findings →

Participants: 72 Evidence: low

Information-Theoretic Geometry HCFIM features for data-limited EEG screening of Alzheimer’s disease and Frontotemporal Dementia

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-10-13

Resting-state EEG is a scalable modality for neurophysiological screening, but conventional spectral descriptors capture only part of the signal organization altered in neurodegenerative disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

The disorders fell into one of three categories based on the topographic relationship of the disease-specific and healthy networks. 5 key findings →

Participants: 1,117 Evidence: low

Interpretable Frequency-Aware Deep Learning for Multi-Class EEG Classification of Neurological Disorders

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-10-12

Electroencephalography (EEG) records cortical activity with high temporal resolution without radiation and at low cost, which makes it a practical signal for automated screening of neurological disorders. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

The Somnogenesis System: A Proposed Biological System for Psychiatry

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-10-08

For more than 150 years, since the idea that mental illness is rooted in the brain first emerged in the mid-1800s, psychiatry has searched for a reliable biological system to anchor its understanding of mental illness. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Retinal biomarkers and dementia risk: A review of evidence across the 14 Lancet modifiable risk factors for dementia

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. PsyArXiv 2026-10-22

As the only central nervous system tissue that can be directly imaged non-invasively using widely available technology, the retina offers a uniquely accessible window into the brain. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Progressive neurodegeneration of the locus coeruleus drives rapid eye movement sleep fragmentation

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. bioRxiv 2026-10-16

Sleep disturbances are common early features of neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Our results converge on the conclusion that vtaVNS does not uniformly amplify cortical responses to external stimuli. 5 key findings →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

We built a computer model that reproduces the rhythms and, crucially, lets the measured timing between slow waves and spindles control how strongly memories are written into cortex. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

In the primary visual cortex (V1), we show that cortical magnification (M) is a deterministic Riemannian coordinate transformation (M \propto 1/\sqrt{\det g}) that equalizes information pressure between the spherical retina and planar cortex.2. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

A Physicist's Perspective on Metabolic Rejuvenation After 50

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-09-09

Chronic metabolic diseases, including Type 2 Diabetes, hypertension, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), prostate enlargement, musculoskeletal joint friction, cardiac arrhythmias, neurodegenerative waste accumulation (Alzheimer's), and elevated intraocular hydraulic pressure (glaucoma), are frequently treated as distinct, unavoidable consequences of chronological aging. 5 key findings →

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