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
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 151–175 of 200 studies published 1998(page 7 of 8)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
From OpenAlex; 12,859 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 37 out of 100.·Brain and language·1998-01-01
As part of a cross-national study of dementia epidemiology, two types of verbal fluency tasks were administered to three groups of subjects, varying in level of literacy and education, recruited from the rural district of Ballabgarh in northern India. 2 key findings →
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a dementia syndrome characterized by peculiar behavioral changes arising from frontotemporal involvement and distinct from Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
We conducted a single-stage community-based study of dementia on all registered residents > or =65 years in age in a rural Chinese community. 2 key findings →
The presenilin-1 (PS1) gene mutation (Pro117Leu), recently identified in a Polish family is characterized by the earliest reported onset (from 24-31 years) of Alzheimer disease (AD) and a very short duration of disease (4-6 years). 3 key findings →
In an attempt to elucidate the pathological implications of intracellular accumulation of the amyloid precursor protein (APP) in postmitotic neurons in vivo, we transferred APP695 cDNA into rat hippocampal neurons by using a replication-defective adenovirus vector. 4 key findings →
Frontotemporal dementia is a neurological disorder characterised by personality changes, deterioration of memory and executive functions as well as stereotypical behaviour. 1 key finding →
The hypothesis is forwarded that sporadic late-onset Alzheimer disease is caused by non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus which is confined to the brain. 4 key findings →
Renal failure is relatively common, but except in association with spina bifida or paraplegia it is unlikely to occur as a result of disease of the CNS. 4 key findings →
The present study examined the relationship between visual attention measures and driving performance in healthy older adults and individuals with very mild and mild dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT). 3 key findings →
Theories of the pathophysiology of schizophrenia have implicated the hippocampus, but controversy remains regarding hippocampal abnormalities in patients with schizophrenia. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Epilepsia·1998-02-01
Our results provide some support for the lateralised model of material specific memory deficits, but suggest that a number of demographic and epilepsy-related factors may interact with the extent and laterality of hippocampal pathology in shaping the nature of the associated neuropsychological deficit. 5 key findings →
Cytokines and chemokines have been implicated in contributing to the initiation, propagation and regulation of immune and inflammatory responses. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Brain research·1998-01-01
Inflammatory processes may play a critical role in the pathogenesis of the degenerative changes and cognitive impairments associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
The epsilon4 allele of apolipoprotein E (apoE) is associated with increased risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and poor outcome after brain injury. 3 key findings →
Excessive cerebral accumulation of the 42-residue amyloid beta-protein (Abeta) is an early and invariant step in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Activated monocytes release a number of substances, including inflammatory cytokines and eicosanoids, that are highly toxic to cells of the central nervous system. 2 key findings →
It is a truism of modern biomedical science that the development of therapies expected to slow or arrest the progression of a disease requires as detailed an understanding of its molecular and cellular pathogenesis as possible. 4 key findings →
EEG coherence can be used to evaluate the functionality of cortical connections and to get information about the synchronization of the regional cortical activity. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Neuroscience research·1998-08-01
According to the amyloid hypothesis for the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), amyloid beta peptide (Abeta) directly affects neurons, leading to neurodegeneration and tau phosphorylation, followed by the production of paired helical filaments (PHF) in neurofibrillary tangles (NFT). 1 key finding →
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 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.