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 23,976–24,000 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 960 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.
As the population ages, risks for cognitive decline threaten independence and quality of life for older adults and present challenges to the health care system. 1 key finding →
There is a pressing demand for improving the quality and efficacy of health care and social support services needed by the world's growing elderly population, especially by those affected by mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD)-type early-stage dementia. 1 key finding →
Amyloid diseases are characterized by the deposition of typically aggregated proteins/peptides in tissues, associated with degeneration and progressive functional impairment. 4 key findings →
There is a critical need to potentially individualize new strategies able to prevent and to slow down the progression of predementia and dementia syndromes. 4 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100.·Psychopharmacology·2008-10-14
The use of positive modulators of PLA2 (especially of cPLA2 and iPLA2) or supplementation with dietary lipid compounds (e.g., arachidonic acid) in combination with cognitive training could be a valuable therapeutic strategy for cognitive enhancement in early-stage AD. 2 key findings →
Non-pharmacological interventions have the potential to reduce cognitive decline and to improve psychosocial aspects in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's dementia, and the absence of side effects makes them a favorable option also for preventive strategies. 5 key findings →
Epidemiological work has, however, identified modifiable lifestyle factors, such as poor diet and physical and cognitive inactivity, that are associated with the risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Identifying feasible and effective interventions aimed at mitigating the effects of cognitive decline in older adults is currently a high priority for researchers, clinicians, and policy makers. 2 key findings →
Patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) gradually lose their cognitive competence, particularly memory, and the ability to perform daily life tasks. 2 key findings →
The purpose of this article is to critically review and synthesize the literature on the effects of nonpharmacological cognitive training on dementia symptoms in early-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementia. 4 key findings →
As the number of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is expected to grow, finding ways to prevent and lower the risk of AD becomes a crucial matter. 1 key finding →
Severe nutritional deficiencies, such as protein energy malnutrition and deficiency of nicotinamide, vitamin B(12), folate, and thiamine, have long been recognized to cause severe confusion. 4 key findings →
It may be that risk and protective factors vary with age, however, in the absence of prophylactic treatment it seems likely that the maintenance of a healthy lifestyle may represent the best option with regard to the prevention of dementia. 2 key findings →
Greater adherence to MedDiet and frequency of consumption of some foods were associated with better scores in several CF tests in elderly individuals with high risk of MS living in a rural community. 3 key findings →
Until recently, clinicians and researchers have performed gait assessments and cognitive assessments separately when evaluating older adults, but increasing evidence from clinical practice, epidemiological studies, and clinical trials shows that gait and cognition are interrelated in older adults. 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.