27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) may be an early indicator of Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD), yet its association with plasma biomarkers remains unclear among middle-aged and older adults (aged 50-86 years). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,712 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There are few validated fluid biomarkers in frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 469 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on previous studies, a preclinical classification for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been proposed. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 160 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Plasma-based biomarkers would be potential biomarkers for early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) because they are more available and cost-effective than cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or neuroimaging. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 185 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
DTI-ALPS values were significantly lower compared to HC in both DLB (Estimate = -0.084 [-0.14 to -0.03], p = 0.004) and MCI-LB (Estimate = -0.058 [-0.11 to -0.002], p = 0.047) DTI-ALPS was also significantly associated with both baseline (t[147] = 2.22, p = 0.028) and longitudinal decline (t[127] = 2.41,p = 0.017) in cognitive score. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 32 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No adverse events occurred over the study period. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We recruited 210 participants; 205 (66.8% male; aged 66.4±11.1 years) had useable data. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 210 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CSF sTREM2 levels are positively associated with an increased risk of AD and MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Collectively, plasma biomarker findings in the low p-tau217 subgroup were more robust than in the mITT population. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Because it lacks a lymphatic circulation, the brain must clear extracellular proteins by an alternative mechanism.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While delirium is associated with cognitive decline and dementia, there is limited evidence to support causality for this relationship. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Women are disproportionately affected by Alzheimer's disease (AD) in terms of both disease prevalence and severity. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 348 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is limited because it is based on non-specific behavioral and neuroimaging findings. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Such findings challenge the proposed sequence and suggest that Aβ-independent precursors underlie AD-typical neurodegenerative patterns. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 29 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The high accuracies for Aβ pathology and future AD dementia using fully automated instruments are promising for implementing plasma biomarkers in clinical trials and clinical routine. 2 key findings →
Participants: 920 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We used multinomial regression models to estimate discrimination [concordance (C) statistics] among three amyloid PET stages (low, intermediate, high), four tau PET stages (Braak 0, 1-2, 3-4, 5-6) and a combined amyloid and tau PET stage (none/low versus intermediate/high severity) using plasma biomarkers as predictors separately within unimpaired and impaired individuals. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,136 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The combination of CSF biomarkers linked to different aspects of neurodegeneration, such as FABP3, α-syn, and AD biomarkers, improves the biochemical characterization of AD and Lewy body disorders. 4 key findings →
Participants: 48 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma p-tau217 demonstrated better performance in the identification of AD pathology and clinical phenotypes in comparison with other variants of p-tau in a memory clinic cohort. 5 key findings →
Participants: 114 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study is the first to delineate the trajectories of plasma biomarkers throughout the Alzheimer's continuum in the Chinese population, providing important implications for future trials targeting plasma GFAP to facilitate AD prevention and treatment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 206 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study provides a systematic framework for selection of assay-specific cutpoints for clinical use of plasma p-tau217 for determination of amyloid status. 4 key findings →
Participants: 427 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Blood-based biomarkers are highly associated with amyloid PET/CSF results in diverse populations enrolled at clinical trial sites. 3 key findings →
Participants: 417 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Failures in Alzheimer's disease (AD) drug trials highlight the need to further explore disease mechanisms and alterations of biomarkers during the development of AD. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 377 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A set of core cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) includes total tau (T-tau), phosphorylated tau (P-tau) and β-amyloid 42 (Aβ42). 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The CSF Aβ42/40 ratio is superior to Aβ42 alone as a marker of amyloid-positivity by PET. 3 key findings →
Participants: 200 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MPP-Aβ might be one of the potential blood biomarkers for the prediction of PiB-PET positivity in the brain. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 353 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
10 of the 2,804 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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
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.
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.
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 →