Rates of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are extremely heterogeneous. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 3,397 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Our results revealed machine learning with novel biomarkers and multiple variables may increase the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results encourage an independent validation cohort study to confirm the indication that the plasma Aβ 1-40 /Aβ 1-42 ratio, assessed via Simoa, may improve future standard of care and clinical trial design. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 276 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite the promise of a multitude of sensors and devices that can be applied, there are no agreed-upon standards for digital biomarkers, nor are there comprehensive evidence-based results for which digital biomarkers may be demonstrated to be most effective. 3 key findings →
Participants: 279 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An optimized immunoassay was used to analyze CSF Ng in a retrospective cohort of 331 participants with different neurodegenerative diseases, including healthy controls (n = 19), biomarker-proven Alzheimer disease (AD) (n = 100), genetic AD (n = 2), behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (n = 20), speech variant frontotemporal dementia (n = 21), Lewy body dementia (n = 13), Parkinson disease (n = 31), progressive supranuclear palsy (n = 46), multiple system atrophy (n = 29), as well as a heterogeneous group with non-neurodegenerative cognitive impairment (n = 50). 1 key finding →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 19 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is often considered an early stage of dementia, with estimated rates of progression to dementia up to 80-90% after approximately 6 years from the initial diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
NULISA plasma biomarkers revealed disease-specific protein patterns. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 194 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Gut microbiota composition was associated with amyloid and p-tau status. 5 key findings →
Participants: 170 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The dementia population is increasing as the world's population is growing older. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study showed that plasma metabolites have the potential to match the AUC of well-established AD CSF biomarkers in a relatively small cohort. 4 key findings →
Participants: 883 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE ε4 genetic variant is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) and is increasingly being implicated in other neurodegenerative diseases. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the increase in large multimodal cohorts and high-throughput technologies, the potential for discovering novel biomarkers is no longer limited by data set size. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The accessibility of the retina with the use of non-invasive and relatively low-cost ophthalmic imaging techniques and analytics provides a unique opportunity to improve the detection, diagnosis and monitoring of systemic diseases. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
As a result, our combined method achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AU-ROC) curve of 98.33, 93.59, 96.83, 94.64, 96.43, and 95.24% for AD vs. MCIs subjects which are high relative to single modality results and other state-of-the-art approaches. 2 key findings →
Participants: 158 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The findings suggest that GPS driving may serve as an effective and accurate digital biomarker for identifying preclinical AD among older adults. 2 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Precision medicine for Alzheimer's disease (AD) necessitates the development of personalized, reproducible, and neuroscientifically interpretable biomarkers, yet despite remarkable advances, few such biomarkers are available. 1 key finding →
Participants: 716 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Digital biomarker prognostic models can be a useful tool to assist large-scale population screening for the early detection of cognitive impairment and patient monitoring over time. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accurate early diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases represents a growing challenge for current clinical practice. 5 key findings →
Participants: 200 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results revealed a universal applicability of the "A/T/N" framework in a Chinese population and established an optimal diagnostic model consisting of cost-effective and non-invasive approaches for diagnosing AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 411 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our results demonstrate that unsupervised digital memory assessments might be used for diagnosis and prognosis in Alzheimer's disease, potentially in combination with plasma biomarkers. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher soluble plasma p-tau levels may be the result of an intersection between insoluble deposits of amyloid-β and tau accumulation in brain, and may be associated with locus coeruleus degeneration. 3 key findings →
Participants: 35 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a global epidemic with Alzheimer's disease (AD) being the leading cause. 3 key findings →
Participants: 273 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Random forest classifier and feature selection procedures were used to select digital biomarkers. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,324 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These preliminary findings suggest that derived digital biomarkers may identify cognitive impairment in preclinical and prodromal AD, and may predict disease progression. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using a targeted proteomic screen, we identified novel candidate biomarkers that complement the best current CSF biomarkers for distinguishing very mildly/mildly demented from cognitively normal individuals. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →