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
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 17,451–17,475 of 17,563 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 699 of 703)· 30,980 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; 16,452 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 31 out of 100.·Minerva Psychiatry·2025-12-01
Sundowning Syndrome (SS) is a clinically observed phenomenon, primarily associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), characterized by the exacerbation of neuropsychiatric symptoms during the late afternoon or evening, or in conditions of reduced ambient illumination. 3 key findings →
Although there were differences between and within the countries, end-of-life care was often affected by the socioeconomic contexts, which represent barriers for access to healthcare services; under-tapped informal caregivers' potential; societal norms and cultural expectations around care and informal caregiving; the dementia-trajectory itself; and an inadequate assurance of policies, skilled workforce, and services. 3 key findings →
Understanding dementia beliefs among Vietnamese people is crucial for the development of evidence-based interventions to promote positive help-seeking behaviors when facing the risk of dementia for themselves and their relatives. 3 key findings →
BackgroundAlzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) affect nearly half of assisted living (AL) residents, the majority of whom have palliative care (PC) needs at the end of life (EOL). 5 key findings →
Palliative care offers specialized care /support to persons with advanced disease, including Older Persons living with dementia related problems. 5 key findings →
This Journal is not only a new publication but also the culmination of a shared vision and a timely response to one of the most significant demographic shifts in human history: the rapid aging of the South Asian population. 5 key findings →
Cerebral small vessel disease is a condition caused by chronic cerebral hypoperfusion due to microvascular damage and is a major contributor to stroke and dementia. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100.·Physiology·2025-05-01
Our research, conducted both in vivo and ex vivo, demonstrated a 50% decrease in pressure-induced constriction in the CADASIL ACT zone. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100.·Revue neurologique·1993-01-01
Genetic linkage studies suggest that Alzheimer's disease (AD) is genetically heterogeneous and that in several early onset families the disease locus is close to the amyloid precursor protein (APP) gene on chromosome 21. 2 key findings →
A neuropathological study of Alzheimer type I (Alz I) and Alzheimer type II (Alz II) as well as Opalski (Opl) cells was performed serially on brain tissue from nine autopsied Wilson's disease (WD) cases. 5 key findings →
This study compared the relationships of the development of both Alzheimer I & II cells to reactive astrogliosis and also their distributional patterns in the demyelinated and non-demyelinated lesions in 6 cases of Wilson's disease by the use of PAP immunohistochemical technique for glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Brain research·2000-05-01
A study on long-term astrocytic responses (from 1 day to 20 months after lesioning in 4-month-old rats, and from 1 day to 6 months in 20-month-old rats) to diverse unilateral damage of the nucleus basalis (nbM) by injection of 40 nmol of ibotenic acid, or 50 or 100 nmols of quisqualic acid was performed using a histochemical method (immunoreactivity against the glial fibrillary acidic protein GFAP). 5 key findings →
[3H]inositol(1,4,5)-trisphosphate (IP3) binding studies have shown decreased [3H]IP3 binding to brain tissue in several neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer's and Huntington's diseases. 2 key findings →
Neuropeptide Y (NPY)-containing neurons are depleted in the cortices of individuals with Alzheimer disease (AD), yet spared in the striatum of patients with Huntington chorea. 2 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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%),
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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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.