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.

AC-1202 was compared to Placebo in several population groups, including: intention-to-treat (ITT), per protocol, and dosage compliant groups. 5 key findings →

Participants: 55 Evidence: high

Conversion of amyloid positive and negative MCI to AD over 3 years: an 11C-PIB PET study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Neurology 2009-07-08

PIB-positive subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are significantly more likely to convert to AD than PIB-negative patients, faster converters having higher PIB retention levels at baseline than slower converters. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Treatment success in Alzheimer disease (AD) trials is generally based on benefits over placebo-treated controls. 2 key findings →

Participants: 3,403 Evidence: high

During follow-up, 203 cases of hospitalisation with dementia were identified. 5 key findings →

Participants: 151 Evidence: moderate

Neuronal accumulation of alpha-synuclein and Lewy body formation are characteristic to many neurodegenerative diseases, including Parkinson's disease (PD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

The brain changes associated with AD may already begin developing early in middle age, especially among APOE epsilon 4 carriers. 5 key findings →

Participants: 603 Evidence: low

Efficacy of rivastigmine for cognitive symptoms in Parkinson disease with dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. The neurologist 2009-07-01

Rivastigmine therapy for PDD is associated with significant tradeoffs in efficacy and adverse effects. 5 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 541 Evidence: high

Updated clinical diagnostic criteria for sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2009-09-22

In recent years, a series of publications have demonstrated a potentially important role for magnetic resonance imaging in the pre-mortem diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Our study estimates the sensitivity and specificity of Medicare claims to identify clinically-diagnosed dementia, and documents how errors in dementia assessment affect dementia cost estimates. 4 key findings →

Participants: 758 Evidence: moderate

Apathy is a persistent behavioural feature in PD with a high incidence and prevalence over time. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 139 Evidence: moderate

Inclusions of TAR DNA-binding protein-43 (TDP-43), a nuclear protein that regulates transcription and RNA splicing, are the defining histopathological feature of frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin-positive inclusions (FTLD-Us) and sporadic and familial forms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Greater fish and omega-3 (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) intake may reduce dementia risk; however, previous studies have reported conflicting results, which were largely based on short-term follow-up. 4 key findings →

Participants: 5,395 Evidence: moderate

HCPs of NH patients with advanced dementia can most commonly expect to encounter medical decisions relating to feeding problems, infections, and pain. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

The in vivo measure of cerebral amyloidosis known as [(11)C]PiB is associated with cross-sectional regionally specific brain atrophy and longitudinal cognitive decline in multiple cognitive domains that occur before the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 135 Evidence: moderate

↑ 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed