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.

The betaA4 peptide, a major component of senile plaques in Alzheimer's disease (AD) brain, has been found in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and blood of both AD patients and normal subjects. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Apolipoprotein E alleles as risk factors in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Annual review of medicine 1996-01-01

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is unique in medicine in that millions of people suffer from what appears to be the same form of disease, and unlike most other late-onset diseases, the genetic etiologies have been well identified. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

To study the metabolism of amyloid beta protein (Abeta) in Alzheimer's disease, we have developed a new approach for analyzing the profile of soluble Abeta and its variants. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Retinal pathology in Alzheimer's disease. I. Ganglion cell loss in foveal/parafoveal retina

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Neurobiology of aging 1996-05-01

Morphometric analysis of the numbers of neurons in the ganglion cell layer (GCL) of the central retina (fovea/foveola/parafoveal retina) in eyes from 9 Alzheimer's disease (AD) and 11 age-matched control cases revealed an overall decrease of 25% in total numbers of neurons in AD as compared with control eyes. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Substantial evidences suggest that the increased cerebral deposition, and neurotoxic action of the beta-amyloid peptide, the major constituent of senile plaques, may represent the underlying cause of the cognitive deficits observed in Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Neurodegenerative disease occurs more frequently in some occupations than in others, and this distribution, which may indicate occupational risk factors, should be further investigated. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Hyper-aluminemia often develops in patients with renal failure being treated with intermittent hemodialysis on a chronic basis, and in severe cases results in an encephalopathy. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Acetylcholinesterase (AChE), an important component of cholinergic synapses, colocalizes with amyloid-beta peptide (A beta) deposits of Alzheimer's brain. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The Geriatric Depression Scale: a review of its development and utility

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. International psychogeriatrics 1996-01-01

This article reviews the significance of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) to practitioners and researchers in clinical gerontology, more than 10 years after the scale was introduced to the scientific community. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

A surface-based technique for warping three-dimensional images of the brain

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 1996-01-01

The authors have devised, implemented, and tested a fast, spatially accurate technique for calculating the high-dimensional deformation field relating the brain anatomies of an arbitrary pair of subjects. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Decreased cyclin dependent kinase in brain of patients with Down syndrome

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 35 out of 100. Neuroscience letters 1996-09-01

In order to study whether phosphokinases might be involved in the neuropathology of Down Syndrome (DS) and Alzheimer disease (AD), cyclin dependent kinase (CDK) activity and protein, phosphokinase C (PKC) and phosphokinase A (PKA) activities have been determined in frontal lobes of DS, AD and control brains. 1 key finding →

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