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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 15,476–15,500 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 620 of 1086)· 28,180 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; 13,658 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2003-04-01
Lacunar infarcts, small deep infarcts that result from occlusion of a penetrating artery, account for about a quarter of all ischaemic strokes. 5 key findings →
Our results suggest that IF induces adaptive responses in the brain and periphery that can suppress inflammation and preserve cognitive function in an animal model of systemic bacterial infection. 5 key findings →
Attention to three themes may help clinicians and investigators meet the challenge of treating the common mental disorders of later life: the effect of these disorders on functioning, prevention of the consequences of mental disorders, and integration of mental health care and primary health care services. 2 key findings →
After two decades of research on nutrition and dementia there is strong evidence for preventive effects of vitamin E, B vitamins, and n-3 fatty acids and deleterious effects of saturated fat on dementia. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·JCI insight·2019-09-19
Insulin resistance associates with increased risk for cognitive decline and dementia; however, the underpinning mechanisms for this increased risk remain to be fully defined. 2 key findings →
Approximately 12% of apparently previously cognitively well patients undergoing anaesthesia and noncardiac surgery will develop symptoms of cognitive dysfunction after their procedure. 5 key findings →
Transient cognitive disorders (delirium and pseudodelirium) are highly prevalent among the elderly, especially those with brain damage. 5 key findings →
The Northwestern University SuperAging Project recruits community dwellers over the age of 80 who have unusually high performance on tests of episodic memory. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2000-03-01
Functional MRI has recently been used to examine activation associated with aging and dementia, yet little is known regarding the effect of cerebral atrophy on fMRI signal. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Biological psychiatry·1993-11-01
Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), we measured the volumes of various brain structures and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in 19 men with dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT) and 18 healthy age-matched control men. 5 key findings →
The percentage of unmetabolized 18 F-T807 in plasma followed a single exponential with a half-life of 17.0 ± 4.2 min. Metabolite-corrected plasma radioactivity concentration fit a biexponential (half-lives, 18.1 ± 5.8 and 2.4 ± 0.5 min). 18 F-T807 in gray matter peaked quickly (SUV > 2 at ∼5 min). 5 key findings →
The plasma reference graphical analysis appeared to be the optimal method of quantification for 18 F-RO-948, yielding strictly time-consistent values of distribution volume and distribution volume ratio at 90 min against the analyses at 120 and 200 min. The reference tissue graphical analysis and SUV ratio were cross-validated against plasma reference graphical analysis. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Neurology·2005-01-01
Because NAA is considered a marker of neuronal integrity, reduced medial temporal and parietal lobe NAA could be an early indication of dementia-related pathology in elderly individuals. 1 key finding →
This study presents the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen (ECAS), developed for ALS patients with physical disability for use by health care professionals. 1 key finding →
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is common in the elderly, in whom it carries a more substantial burden of hepatic (nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma) and extra-hepatic manifestations and complications (cardiovascular disease, extrahepatic neoplasms) than in younger age groups. 1 key finding →
The increasing prevalence of cognitive impairment among the older adult population warrants attention to the identification of practices that may minimize the progression of early forms of cognitive impairment, including the transitional stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), to permanent stages of dementia. 3 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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.