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
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 2,376–2,400 of 15,839 studies scoring 30–49 out of 100 (page 96 of 634)· 28,580 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; 14,058 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.
In a multivariate analysis, associations of MS4A6A (rs610932; odds ratio = 0.632, Bonferroni corrected P = .019) and CD33 (rs3865444; odds ratio = 1.492, Bonferroni corrected P = .017) with LOAD were replicated successfully. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Brain·2013-08-26
Genome-wide association studies have identified a number of risk variants for Alzheimer’s disease implicated in inflammatory responses (Bettens et al., 2013); exome sequencing has revealed polymorphisms in the microglial receptor TREM2 gene as a rare but significant risk for Alzheimer’s disease (Guerreiro et al., 2013; Jonsson et al., 2013); and recently, the CD33 risk allele has been shown to inhibit microglial clearance of amyloid-β (Bradshaw et al., 2013; Griciuc et al., 2013). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Brain·2015-07-23
These same brain areas were then assessed in a cohort of patients with Alzheimer’s disease versus a healthy older reference group, using a region of interest approach combined with standard structural (MRI), metabolic (fluorodeoxyglucose-PET) and amyloid ligand (florbetapir-PET) neuroimaging. 5 key findings →
Type 2 diabetes and hyperglycemia with the resulting increase of glucose concentrations in the brain impair the outcome of ischemic stroke, and may increase the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
The overall objective of the guideline is to provide up‐to‐date, evidence‐based recommendations for the management of bullous pemphigoid (BP). 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Neurology·1992-09-01
We followed 65 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease, who were initially mildly to moderately impaired, with semiannual assessments of cognitive and functional performance for up to 4 years. 5 key findings →
Sleep disruption, nightly restlessness, sundowning, and other circadian disturbances are frequently seen in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·Age and Ageing·2006-06-06
Most patients came from the community (43% home without help and 42% home with help compared with 14% in assisted living and 1% in a nursing home). 5 key findings →
Although there was no difference in the microbial α-diversity among the three groups, patients with AD or MCI had increased β-diversity compared with healthy controls. 5 key findings →
Missense mutations in the alpha-synuclein gene cause familial Parkinson's disease (PD), and alpha-synuclein is a major component of Lewy bodies (LBs) in sporadic PD, dementia with LBs (DLB), and the LB variant of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
In this study we used an in situ approach to identify the oxidized nucleosides 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine (8OHdG) and 8-hydroxyguanosine (8OHG), markers of oxidative damage to DNA and RNA, respectively, in cases of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·The Gerontologist·2003-08-01
Caregivers in the combined family therapy and technology intervention experienced a significant reduction in depressive symptoms at 6 months. 4 key findings →
Some studies have suggested that people with a high educational level have a lower risk of developing dementia compared to people with a low educational level. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100.·PubMed Central·1991-01-01
The coexistence of cerebrovascular disease leading to deep white matter infarction and normal-pressure hydrocephalus has been noted previously in clinical studies, as both diseases can present with the triad of gait disturbance, dementia, and incontinence. 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%),
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 (3.6% 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.