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 17,476–17,500 of 17,563 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 700 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.
Neuropsychologic tests were performed in subjects with Down syndrome in order to assess the effect of a 90-day treatment with L-acetyl-carnitine (LAC). 3 key findings →
A blind study was set up to examine the in vitro growth characteristics of skin fibroblasts from 2 individuals with and 9 at risk for familial Alzheimer disease, 4 individuals with sporadic Alzheimer disease, 18 with Down syndrome as well as 5 younger and 6 older controls. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Comparative medicine·2012-04-01
Regulator of calcineurin 1 (RCAN1) is related to the expression of human neurologic disorders such as Down syndrome, Alzheimer disease, and chromosome 21q deletion syndrome. 3 key findings →
Numerous intraneuronal neurofibrillary tangles and senile (neuritic) plaques are the two characteristic lesions in Alzheimer disease (AD) and adult Down syndrome (DS). 4 key findings →
Recent reports suggest that cultivated nonneuronal cells from individuals with Alzheimer disease (AD) and other specific hereditary neurodegenerative disorders show hypersensitivity to DNA-damaging agents such as x-rays and radiomimetic chemicals. 3 key findings →
Down syndrome (DS), characterised by compromised brain development and intellectual challenges, often manifests Alzheimer's disease (AD) -like symptoms. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Neuroscience letters·2010-02-04
Recent evidences indicate that polymorphisms within the promoter region of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) gene may elevate the risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
The present study was undertaken to validate the measurement of biomarkers as a supplement to the latest diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia by National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA) work group using a sample attending a tertiary care center in Southern India. 4 key findings →
Some studies have shown that CSF amyloid-beta 1-42 (Aβ₁₋₄₂), total tau (T-tau) and tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau(181p)) proteins are useful diagnostic markers for distinguishing between clinically stable mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients and those who will develop Alzheimeŕs disease (AD). 4 key findings →
The development of diagnostic markers for earlier and more reliable diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD) is essential, particularly because therapeutic medication is available for AD. 4 key findings →
Identifying patients at risk for developing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD) remains challenging in clinical practice, even as scientific understanding of dementia advances generally. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Age and Ageing·2014-06-22
The 101 CADIS patients demonstrated several new findings: (i) the mean delay between symptom onset and admission was 1.4 days; (ii) for daily attention tests, 5-digit span forward improved to baseline in a mean of 1.3 days, whereas 6-digit span improved in a mean of 5.7 days; (iii) Delirium index, a 7-question instrument for monitoring delirium [2–3] improved to baseline in a mean of 5.8 days. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Innovation in Aging·2018-11-01
The Richmond Health and Wellness Program (RHWP) provides interprofessional care coordination and wellness services within Richmond’s low income senior housing communities for approximately 1,000 subsidized housing units. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·European Psychiatry·2026-06-01
The behavioural and mental health needs of people with PWS result from the interactions between biological vulnerabilities associated with having PWS and living in a changing and demanding environment. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Knowable Magazine·2024-01-09
Most remarkably, research by Cryan and others has shown that transplanting microbes from the guts of people with psychiatric disorders like depression to the guts of rodents can cause comparable symptoms in the animals.CREDIT: JAMES PROVOST (CC BY-ND)Neuroscientist John CryanUniversity College CorkThese effects may occur in several ways — through the vagus nerve connecting the gut to the brain, through the influence of gut bacteria on our immune systems, or by microbes synthesizing molecules that our nerve cells use to communicate. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100.·Age and Ageing·2017-02-21
As a result, the similarities of older people in residential care to those in nursing care homes greatly outweigh the differences and arguably strengthen the case for RN input to all care home residents. 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 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.