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
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 16,201–16,225 of 17,283 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 649 of 692)· 30,580 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; 16,054 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 36 out of 100.·Human brain mapping·2009-04-01
The pattern of degenerative changes in the brain white matter (WM) in aging, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been under debate. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) has a slow onset, so it is challenging to distinguish brain changes in healthy elderly persons from incipient AD. 3 key findings →
Effectively, modern research has confirmed Hortega's view of the origin of the microgliacyte from circulating monocytes of the monocyte-macrophage series that invade the brain during embryonic and early postnatal life. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neuropsychologia·2008-02-14
Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), a promising technique for measuring brain activities during rest, has attracted much attention in the past few years. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neuron·2016-09-15
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by cognitive decline and neuronal network dysfunction, but the underlying mechanisms remain unknown. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·1980-10-01
A quantitative and clincally correlated investigation was carried out to determine the divisional distribution of volumetric and cell-packing density changes in the amygdala in patients with advanced aging and senile dementia. 2 key findings →
Cerebral volume loss has long been associated with normal aging, but whether this is due to aging itself or to age-related diseases, including incipient Alzheimer disease, is uncertain. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2008-08-06
This study aimed to investigate the atrophy of the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) and medical temporal lobe (MTL) structures (i.e., the entorhinal cortex (ERC) and hippocampus) and the regional disruption of the cingulum bundle in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Brain research·2016-05-25
Polygenetic risk factors and reduced expression of many genes in late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) impedes identification of a target(s) for disease-modifying therapies. 3 key findings →
Much of the research on delaying the onset of symptoms of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has focused on pharmacotherapy, but environmental factors have also been acknowledged to play a significant role. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·NeuroImage·2010-03-12
Effects of normal aging such as loss of PCC co-activity could be detected by ICA, but not by signal time course correlation analyses of DMN inter-connectivity. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Immunobiology·2010-06-04
In contrast to the tremendous amount of research data from the central nervous system, relatively little is known about microglial homeostasis in the retina. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neuropsychologia·2003-01-01
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Huntington's disease (HD) are degenerative disorders, with predominant involvement, respectively of frontal neocortex and striatum. 2 key findings →
The frontal cortex, generally vulnerable in Alzheimer's disease, had higher concentrations of all analytes than the occipital cortex which is generally unaffected. 2 key findings →
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a common, incurable, and progressive dementia, characterized by loss of learning and memory and the neuropathologic accumulation of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the brain. 1 key finding →
Heat shock proteins (Hsps) are highly conserved and under physiological conditions act as molecular chaperones and/or have anti-apoptotic activities. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2008-10-01
In the homozygous and heterozygous states, GBA mutations are associated with a spectrum of parkinsonian phenotypes ranging from Parkinson disease, mostly of the akinetic type, to a less common phenotype characteristic of Lewy body dementia. 5 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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%),
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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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.