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 15,726–15,750 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 630 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.
Cerebral blood flow (CBF) alterations and amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation have been independently linked to cognitive deficits in older adults at risk for dementia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2010-09-15
We applied an automated hippocampal segmentation technique based on adaptive boosting (AdaBoost) to the 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) baseline and 1-year follow-up data of 243 subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 96 with Alzheimer's disease (AD), and 145 normal controls (NC) scanned as part of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). 3 key findings →
Improved prediction of progression to Alzheimer's Disease (AD) among older individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is of high clinical and societal importance. 4 key findings →
A hypothetical construct of "cognitive reserve" is widely used to explain how, in the face of neurodegenerative changes that are similar in nature and extent, individuals vary considerably in the severity of cognitive aging and clinical dementia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Brain research·2003-10-01
Neurofilaments, a major cytoskeletal constituent of neuronal cells, can be released into the cerebrospinal fluid during several neurodegenerative diseases. 4 key findings →
As the population ages, the economic and societal impacts of neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric disorders are expected to rise sharply. 4 key findings →
There is increasing evidence that deficient clearance of β-amyloid (Aβ) contributes to its accumulation in late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Autophagy·2013-01-01
Current evidence suggests a central role for autophagy in Alzheimer disease (AD), and dysfunction in the autophagic system may lead to amyloid-β (Aβ) accumulation. 4 key findings →
Many trials of drugs aimed at preventing or clearing β-amyloid pathology have failed to demonstrate efficacy in recent years and further trials continue with drugs aimed at the same targets and mechanisms. 4 key findings →
Cyclooxygenase (COX) catalyses the first committed step in the synthesis of prostanoids, a large family of arachidonic acid metabolites comprising prostaglandins, prostacyclin, and thromboxanes, and is a major target of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). 4 key findings →
Macrophage/microglia (M phi) are the principal immune cells in the central nervous system (CNS) concomitant with inflammatory brain disease and play a significant role in the host defense against invading microorganisms. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2001-11-01
Interleukin-1 (IL-1)-1) is a pluripotent immunomodulatory cytokine that has an initiating role in cellular and humoral immunity in the periphery. 4 key findings →
Hallmarks of central nervous system (CNS) disease in AIDS patients are headaches, fever, subtle cognitive changes, abnormal reflexes, and ataxia. 4 key findings →
Chemokines represent key factors in the outburst of the immune response, by activating and directing the leukocyte traffic, both in lymphopoiesis and in immune surveillance. 4 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a highly complex neurodegenerative disorder of the aged that has multiple factors which contribute to its etiology in terms of initiation and progression. 4 key findings →
Recent studies suggest that excitotoxicity may contribute to neuronal damage in neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and multiple sclerosis. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Journal of virology·1999-01-01
Microglia are the main human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) reservoir in the central nervous system and most likely play a major role in the development of HIV dementia (HIVD). 4 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.