Get help now — free helplines

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 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call 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) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed 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.

Find studies

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 →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

Low density lipoprotein-related protein (LRP) is a transmembrane receptor, localized mainly in hepatocytes, fibroblasts, and neurons. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Cerebrospinal fluid markers in dementia with lewy bodies compared with Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub 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 →

Participants: 33 Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: low

Aged individuals with Down syndrome (DS) develop senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles consistent with Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

These data show a new role for DAP12 signaling in regulating formation of multinucleated osteoclasts. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Previously, we reported that morning bright light therapy improved sleep time and cognitive function in Alzheimer type of dementia. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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 →

Participants: 56 Evidence: low

Divided attention markedly impairs the ability of patients with AD to regulate the stride-to-stride variations in gait timing. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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 →

Participants: 25 Evidence: low

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 →

Evidence: high

↑ Change the filters

Where “Free full text” comes from

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 tier up to 10 pts
  • Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
  • Study design up to 12 pts
  • Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
  • Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
  • How recent up to 5 pts
  • Sample size up to 4 pts
  • Effect reported up to 3 pts
  • Studied in people up to 3 pts
  • Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
  • Times cited up to 7 pts
  • Citations per year up to 5 pts
  • Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
  • Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
  • Still being cited up to 4 pts
  • Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
  • Institution's track record up to 3 pts
  • Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
  • Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
  • Free to read up 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.

See the full, machine-readable breakdown of this library's coverage →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed