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 22,501–22,525 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 901 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.
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Brain Sciences·2025-11-19
Dementia is a growing global health concern in aging societies, leading to a progressive decline in cognitive function that severely impairs daily life. 5 key findings →
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the main mechanisms underlying health issues associated with functional and structural brain changes. 1 key finding →
Epidemiological evidence has revealed an associative link between sepsis survivorship and increased risk of dementia, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Alzheimer’s disease (AD), the most prevalent form of dementia in the elderly, involves critical changes such as reduced aerobic glycolysis in astrocytes and increased neuronal apoptosis, both of which are significant in the disease’s pathology. 2 key findings →
JOURNAL/nrgr/04.03/01300535-202606000-00056/figure1/v/2026-02-11T151048Z/r/image-tiff Cerebral small vessel disease is a major vascular contributor to cognitive impairment and dementia. 4 key findings →
For over a century after their discovery astrocytes were regarded merely as cells located among other brain cells to hold and give support to neurons. 1 key finding →
Alzheimer disease is a multifactorial neurodegenerative disorder characterized by amyloid-beta plaques, tau tangles, and neuroinflammation, with emerging evidence highlighting a potential role for brain lymphatic dysfunction. 5 key findings →
APP/PS1 mice at 6 months were randomly allocated to two dietary groups: one receiving ad libitum (AL) feeding and the other undergoing IF for 1 month. 5 key findings →
Alzheimer's Disease (AD), the most common form of dementia, is pathologically defined by extracellular beta-amyloid (Aβ) plaques and intraneuronal neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs), accompanied by chronic neuroinflammation. 1 key finding →
IFNAR1 plays a crucial role in brain and mitochondrial homeostasis, loss of which results in neurodegeneration and neuropathology resembling PDD. 3 key findings →
The immune system plays a dynamic role in neurodegenerative diseases, and purinergic receptors allow immune cells to recognize neuronal signaling, cell injury, or stress. 4 key findings →
Lewy body dementia (LBD), which includes Parkinson's disease dementia and dementia with Lewy bodies, is characterized by progressive cognitive decline, α-synuclein (α-Syn) aggregation, and concurrent microglial activation and neuroinflammation. 4 key findings →
Retrograde bias better predicted tau progression than anterograde bias, but our best-fitting biophysical models incorporate the mixed effects of both retrograde- and anterograde-directed spread, with notable tau-strain-specific differences. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Biomedicines·2025-02-21
Transgenic iPSC lines provide a unique tool to study the molecular and genetic mechanisms of FTDP-17 caused by the presence of the c.2013T > G (p.N279K) mutation, as well as to test potential drugs in vitro. 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100.·Biomedicines·2025-11-26
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most prevalent cause of dementia, characterized by progressive cognitive decline, amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques, and neurofibrillary tangles composed of hyperphosphorylated tau protein. 5 key findings →
Alcohol use disorder (AUD) is linked with changes in brain structure and function, with robust evidence for neurodegenerative changes, including synaptic loss in preclinical models. 2 key findings →
Primary and secondary tauopathies are major causes of dementia characterized by the abnormal accumulation of microtubule-associated protein tau. 1 key finding →
Patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) have two types of abnormal protein buildups: amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles, in addition to the early synaptic dysfunction associated with the enzymes acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE). 3 key findings →
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Abnormal accumulation of tau fibrillar aggregates is a hallmark of tauopathies, including Alzheimer’s disease. 2 key findings →
Tau protein plays a pivotal role in maintaining neuronal structure and function through its regulation of microtubule stability and neuronal polarity. 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.