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 18,901–18,925 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 757 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.
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia, an eversible, progressive disease that causes problems with memory, thinking, language, planning, and behavior. 1 key finding →
Three monoclonal antibodies directed against specific forms of the amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide have been granted accelerated or traditional approval by the FDA as treatments for Alzheimer disease, representing the first step towards bringing disease-modifying treatments for this disease into clinical practice. 3 key findings →
With full FDA approval and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services coverage of lecanemab and donanemab, a growing number of practices are offering anti-amyloid immunotherapy to appropriate patients with cognitive impairment or mild dementia due to amyloid-positive Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related inflammation (CAA-ri), a rare form of vasculitis associated with amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition in vessel walls, has been proposed as a spontaneous human model of the amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) occurring after anti-Aβ immunotherapy for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), thought to reflect immune responses to vascular amyloid, have been detected in several amyloid-modifying therapy trials for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Based on the improved efficacy/safety profile in non-clinical models of SAR228810, a first-in-man single and multiple dose administration clinical study has been initiated in AD patients. 3 key findings →
However, these therapies are associated with amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA), particularly in individuals carrying the APOE ε4 allele, necessitating close monitoring and individualized risk assessment. 2 key findings →
With the advent of PET imaging in 1976, 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG)-PET became the preferred method for in vivo investigation of cerebral processes, including regional hypometabolism in Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Three recent anti-amyloid-β antibody trials for Alzheimer's disease reported similar effect sizes, used non-reactive saline as placebo, and showed large numbers of adverse events including imaging anomalies (ARIA) that correlate with cognitive changes. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Journal of neurology·2025-10-17
The past several decades have yielded deeper insights into the multifactorial pathogenesis and intervention strategies of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neuroscience·2025-10-10
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder affecting millions worldwide, and with advancements in the medical field, Anti-amyloid monoclonal antibodies (AA mAbs) targeting amyloid-β have emerged as potential disease-modifying agents altering AD pathology. 1 key finding →
The so-called "amyloid cascade hypothesis" provides an elegant explanation of Alzheimer's disease (AD), has motivated the amyloid-lowering therapeutic strategy, and led to the elaboration of a rich experimental and conceptual toolkit for the field to progress. 1 key finding →
Patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) can now be treated with monoclonal antibodies aiming at clearing amyloid plaques from the brain parenchyma. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Cell reports·2018-03-01
In Alzheimer's disease, neurofibrillary tangle pathology appears to spread along neuronal connections, proposed to be mediated by the release and uptake of abnormal, disease-specific forms of microtubule-binding protein tau MAPT. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurology. Genetics·2019-04-01
There are few disease-modifying therapeutics for neurodegenerative diseases, but successes on the development of antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) therapeutics for spinal muscular atrophy and Duchenne muscular dystrophy predict a robust future for ASOs in medicine. 1 key finding →
These findings suggest the potential of passive immunization targeting proximal N-terminal domain tau 6-18 as a disease-modifying approach to AD and related tauopathies. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Acta neuropathologica·2018-03-03
The accumulation of misfolded α-synuclein (aSyn) and neuron loss define several neurodegenerative disorders including Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 3 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.