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 19,151–19,175 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 767 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.
The cerebral cortex of Alzheimer's and Down syndrome patients is characterized by the presence of protein deposits in neurofibrillary tangles, neuritic plaques, and neuropil threads. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Molecular psychiatry·2018-08-31
The typical abnormalities observed in the brain of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients include synaptic alterations, neuronal death, brain inflammation, and the accumulation of protein aggregates in the form of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. 3 key findings →
Human hereditary cerebral hemorrhage with amyloidosis of the Dutch type (HCHWA-D), an autosomal dominant form of cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA), is characterized by extensive amyloid deposition in the small leptomeningeal arteries and cortical arterioles, which lead to an early death of those afflicted in their fifth or sixth decade. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2004-11-01
Early endosomes are a major site of amyloid precursor protein (APP) processing and a convergence point for molecules of pathologic relevance to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Cellular senescence is a homeostatic biological process characterized by a permanent state of cell cycle arrest that can contribute to the decline of the regenerative potential and function of tissues. 1 key finding →
Protease nexin-II (PN-II) [amyloid beta-protein precursor (APP)] and the amyloid beta-protein are major constituents of neuritic plaques and cerebrovascular deposits in individuals with Alzheimer's disease and Down syndrome. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100.·Nature·1987-09-01
Amyloid beta-protein (AP) is a peptide of relative molecular mass (Mr) 42,000 found in the senile plaques, cerebrovascular amyloid deposits, and neurofibrillary tangles of patients with Alzheimer's disease and Down's syndrome (trisomy 21). 2 key findings →
With the recently cloned complementary DNA probe, lambda Am4 for the chromosome 21 gene encoding brain amyloid polypeptide (beta amyloid protein) of Alzheimer's disease, leukocyte DNA from three patients with sporadic Alzheimer's disease and two patients with karyotypically normal Down syndrome was found to contain three copies of this gene. 2 key findings →
Trisomy of chromosome 21 (TS21) is the most common autosomal aneuploidy compatible with postnatal survival with a prevalence of 1 in 700 newborns. 5 key findings →
A subset of aged individuals with Down syndrome (DS) exhibits the clinical features of Alzheimer's disease (AD) but our ability to detect dementia in this population is hampered by developmental differences as well as the sensitivity of existing test tools. 1 key finding →
These early increases in Aβ 1-42 , P-T181-tau, and P-S396-tau in individuals with DS may provide a basis for early intervention as targeted treatments become available. 2 key findings →
By employing the hybridoma technique, 49 mAbs recognizing Tau (1-22), nine mAbs targeting p-Tau231, one mAb targeting p-Tau217, and two mAbs targeting p-Tau181 were developed. 5 key findings →
To simply and rapidly detect the highly phosphorylated tau protein at threonine 217 (p-tau217) as a precautionary measure against Alzheimer's disease and distinguish it from other neurodegenerative diseases, a novel immunosensor was prepared using luminol as the electrochemiluminescent (ECL) sensing probe reinforced by Au-Cu nanoparticles (Au-Cu NPs). 1 key finding →
Alpha-synucleinopathies, such as Parkinson's disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and multiple system atrophy (MSA), are a class of neurodegenerative diseases. 2 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.