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
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 18,326–18,350 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 734 of 1086)· 28,180 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; 13,658 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.
In 4 cases of Parkinson's disease (PD), 2 cases of Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and 3 age-matched controls, the TUNEL/ISEL method was used to detect DNA fragmentation in substantia nigra locus coeruleus and cerebral cortex [method by Gold et al. In addition, immunohistochemistry was performed for an array of apoptosis-related proteins, i.e. the recently described apoptosis specific protein cJun/AP1 (ASP), the proto-oncogenes c-Jun, c-Jun AP1, Bcl2, Bax, Bcl-x, p53, CD 95 (Fas/Apo-1) 4 key findings →
Our framework highlights individual-, system-, and community-level factors and resources influencing person-centered eating and swallowing care for PLWD. 5 key findings →
In 1996, the St. John's region had a population of 8,435 > or = 75 years, with 996 nursing home (NH) beds and 550 supervised care (SC) beds. 1 key finding →
Beneficiaries with a new diagnosis of Alzheimer disease and related dementias, hypertension, and psychiatric disorders had relatively high rates of switching into MA plans and low rates of switching out of MA plans. 5 key findings →
Ninety-four percent of hospices and 72% of PC programs had served at least one patient with a primary diagnosis of dementia within the past year. 5 key findings →
A total of 12,237 cases of donepezil and 6975 cases of rivastigmine were submitted to the BNHI for prior authorization; among them, 72.6% of donepezil and 66.5% of rivastigmine cases received authorization. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurology and Therapy·2024-12-19
In FFS, AD incidence (2008-2018) decreased (138 to 104); MCI incidence increased (8 to 47), but the sum (MCI + AD) was relatively stable (146 to 151). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Innovation in Aging·2025-12-01
Among PWD with Medicaid, out-of-pocket costs for nursing homes and assisted living facilities were significantly higher (60%) compared to those TM (33%) and MA (30%). 5 key findings →
Stakeholder feedback led to substantive refinements, including delivery across six structured sessions, prioritisation of emotional safety and identity preservation, and explicit focus on carer‐mediated behaviour change. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Diabetes·2018-06-22
For patients with serious comorbidities, diabetes management guidelines recommend more relaxed glycemic targets (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c] <8-8.5% rather than <7%) and cautious use of agents known to cause hypoglycemia. 5 key findings →
In this study on Medicare patients with AF, Black race, low-income subsidy, and dual eligibility were found to be associated with delayed OAC initiation, suggesting potential disparities in the care of AF with timely OAC treatment. 5 key findings →
In both adolescents and adults with SUD, approximately 95% did not perceive a need for treatment.1 Although drug-related overdose deaths are declining, over 98,000 American deaths occurred in 2024.2 The vast majority of drug overdose deaths involve unregulated opioids, and in 2022 roughly 6.1 million people had an opioid use disorder (OUD) in the prior year.1 Costs related to the consequences of substance use the United States were nearly $1.5 trillion in 2020, up 37% from $1.07 trillion in 2017.3,4 Unhealthy substance use and untreated SUD may increase the risk of significant comorbid chronic health conditions, death from overdose, or suicide. 5 key findings →
Rural patients with ADRD had 1.23 higher adjusted odds (P < .001) of going to the ED for a preventable visit compared to urban counterparts. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurology·2023-04-25
14,292 patients were diagnosed with dementia over 2018–2021 (age 76.5+/−10.3 years; 53.1% female), with 96.3% linked to a census-tract-level ADI. 5 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
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.