74/100
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a remarkable challenge for healthcare in the 21st century. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Accelerated biological aging, particularly DunedinPACE, was associated with increasing levels of plasma ADRD biomarkers over time. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,366 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on family informant reports and clinical observations, the median age at onset (AAO) among affected individuals in these pedigrees was 48.50 (44.0, 51.8) years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 206 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The panel cautions users of this guideline that there is significant variability in diagnostic test accuracy and many commercially available BBM tests do not meet these thresholds, especially using a single cutoff. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic-review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mean (SD) baseline age of 758 participants was 61.5 (6.1) years, and 424 participants [55.9%] were female. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 758 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid-beta 42 (Aβ42) and phosphorylated tau (pTau) levels in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) reflect core features of the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) more directly than clinical diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Participants: 8,074 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
73/100
Neuroinflammation and cerebrovascular dysfunction are early events occurring already at presymptomatic stages of AD and contribute to disease progression. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 508 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Changes in β-amyloid (Aβ) and hyperphosphorylated tau (T) in brain and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) precede Alzheimer's disease (AD) symptoms, making the CSF proteome a potential avenue to understand disease pathophysiology and facilitate reliable diagnostics and therapies. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
73/100
In TRIAD, ALZpath p-tau217 (β = 0.45, p = 0.02) and p-tau217+Janssen (β = 0.67, p = 0.002), and in ADNI p-tau217 (β = 0.90, p = 0.002) increased faster in A+E4+. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,039 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma p-tau217 levels decreased significantly from 3 months, with the greatest decline between 3 and 6 months, followed by a plateau. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 153 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Adding MDLC to p-tau217 significantly explained longitudinal cognitive trajectory beyond p-tau217 alone. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 183 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 504 enrolled patients, 491 completed POD assessment (mean [SD] age, 68.4 [8.3] years; 385 [78.4%] male), of whom 106 (21.6%) developed POD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
For Aβ42/Aβ40, cutoffs across cohorts were <0.059 (BioFINDER), <0.057 (ADNI), and <0.058 (UCSF). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 750 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Three AD subtypes were identified. Subtype 1, enriched in RNA metabolism pathways, showed the mildest atrophy and slowest cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 550 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this prospective cohort study, we included adults aged 40 years or older with subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia, based on cognitive test results and clinical assessments, consecutively recruited at two memory clinics in Sweden, as part of the Swedish BioFINDER-2 study. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 572 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants had a mean (SD) age of 66.9 (9.9) years; 971 (33.3%) were Aβ positive by either CSF or PET, 1667 (57.2%) were women, and 1108 (38.1%) carried at least 1 APOE ε4 allele. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,916 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Circulating NfL and GFAP may, independently and jointly, provide useful clinical insight regarding dementia risk and prognosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,712 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mean age was 74.2 years (SD, 8.3 years), 48% were women, 23% had subjective cognitive decline, 44% had mild cognitive impairment, and 33% had dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 307 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
72/100
The best CSF measures for identifying MCI-AD were Aβ42/total tau (t-tau) and Aβ42/hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) (area under the curve [AUC] 0.93-0.94). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 122 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the 1453 participants in the Framingham dementia study sample, the mean (SD) age was 75 (7) years; 792 (54.5%) were female. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,453 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
72/100
Of 343 participants, the mean (SD) age was 72.56 (7.24) years, and 157 (51.1%) were female. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 343 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In response to sleep loss (+17.2%), compared with normal sleep (+1.8%), the evening to morning ratio was increased for t-tau ( p = 0.035). 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this case-control study, blood biomarkers indicative of AD pathology demonstrated different dynamics of change after cardiac arrest. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 80 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In participants with early symptomatic AD, zagotenemab failed to achieve significant slowing of clinical disease progression compared with placebo. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 360 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We demonstrated significant elevations in blood GFAP and YKL-40 levels in patients on the AD continuum compared with CU individuals. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,366 Evidence: high
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
- Randomized / 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
- Multicenter 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 32,180 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 32,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66.5% of the library) and OpenAlex (15.8%), 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.
1,045 records (3.2% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events
Last updated