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
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 201–225 of 355 studies published 2003(page 9 of 15)· 27,380 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
From OpenAlex; 12,859 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 main objective was to investigate the acetylcholinesterase E (AChE) activity in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients with three common dementia disorders. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·The Lancet. Neurology·2003-04-01
Lacunar infarcts, small deep infarcts that result from occlusion of a penetrating artery, account for about a quarter of all ischaemic strokes. 5 key findings →
Epidemiological studies of Alzheimer patients from a wide variety of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds have identified education and occupation as environmental factors that can affect the risk of developing disease. 4 key findings →
Although the Alzheimer amyloid protein precursor (APP) has been studied intensely for more than a decade, its function in neurons is unresolved. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Archives of neurology·2003-09-01
Most patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) exhibit diffuse plaque-only pathology with rare neocortical neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs), as opposed to the widespread cortical neurofibrillary-tau involvement in Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
RAVLT was administered as part of a more extensive neuropsychological battery at baseline evaluation in 116 unselected patients referred by subjective memory complaints (SMC). 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100.·Brain research·2003-10-01
Neurofilaments, a major cytoskeletal constituent of neuronal cells, can be released into the cerebrospinal fluid during several neurodegenerative diseases. 4 key findings →
Using a stress process model, risk factors (caregiving stressors, caregiver health, and negative social interactions) and protective factors (caregiving appraisals and social resources) were examined as predictors of family caregiver well-being (depression and life satisfaction). 1 key finding →
Patients with major depression may have structural abnormalities of the hippocampus that can be detected by analysis of hippocampal shape but not volume. 2 key findings →
These results demonstrate increased production of the proinflammatory cytokine, TNFalpha and decreased production of the anti-inflammatory cytokine TGFbeta in patients with MCI at risk to develop AD, suggesting a propensity towards inflammation in this patient group and indicating that CNS inflammation is a early hallmark in the pathogenesis of AD. 3 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Neurobiology of aging·2003-11-01
In order to assess peripheral levels and activities of a broad spectrum of non-enzymatic and enzymatic antioxidants in elderly subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD), plasma levels of water-soluble (Vitamin C and uric acid) and of lipophilic (Vitamin A, Vitamin E and carotenoids including lutein, zeaxanthin, beta-cryptoxanthin, lycopene, alpha- and beta-carotene) antioxidant micronutrients as well as activities of plasma and red blood cell (RBC) superoxide dismutase (SOD) and of plasma glutathione peroxidase (GPx) were measured in 25 patients with MCI, 63 AD patients and 53 controls. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100.·Neurology·2003-07-08
Fifteen cases were identified (14 men). All had clear histories of dream enactment behavior, and 10 had RBD confirmed by polysomnography. 5 key findings →
The construct of psychosis of dementia was validated, and the severity of both psychosis and aggressiveness was reduced with risperidone treatment in a robust and dose-related way, with a continuing response over the 12-week trial period. 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%),
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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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.