Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurological condition that leads to dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
29,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
28/100
Alzheimer's disease is a neurodegenerative disorder affecting millions globally, with early detection being critical for effective management. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early detection of Alzheimer's disease is crucial for effective treatment, and the use of brain MRI images has become a common method for diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Early Stages of Alzheimer’s Detection project focuses on identifying signs of Alzheimer’s disease at the earliest possible stage using advanced machine learning and medical imaging techniques. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Early Stages of Alzheimer’s Detection project focuses on identifying signs of Alzheimer’s disease at the earliest possible stage using advanced machine learning and medical imaging techniques. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's Disease acts as a degenerative brain trauma that results in poor memory, alongside impairing mental functioning. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
28/100
Alzheimer's disease is a form of progressive dementia that significantly impacts the quality of life of patients and their families. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study proposes a deep learning-based framework to detect and classify Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the early stages using medical imaging, and specifically Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Alzheimer disease represents a major medical and social challenge owning to the complexity of its diagnosis, especially at the preclinical stage. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
26/100
The accurate diagnosis tends to remain critical for the improvement of the patient outcomes in the Alzheimer’s disease (AD), where a progressive neurodegenerative disorder with the growing of the global impact. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Penyakit Alzheimer adalah jenis demensia akibat kerusakan pada neuron otak yang memengaruhi memori, bahasa, dan berpikir. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
25/100
This survey presents 50 research papers focussed on various techniques in Alzheimer classification techniques using 3D MRI images, and the categorisation of the techniques is made based on the fusion-based, convolutional neural network (CNN)-based, random forest (RF)-based and support vector machine (SVM)-based approaches. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
25/100
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The integration of artificial intelligence in medical image classification has significantly advanced disease detection. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitively normal older adults are often regarded as a homogeneous population in preventive and disease-modifying clinical trials for dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 1,136 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
INTRODUCTIONNeurodegenerative research identifies biomarkers to confirm presence of disease and inform about risk for clinical symptoms. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine the common signature of dysregulated brain glucose metabolism in late-onset age-associated neurodegenerative diseases (A2NDs), including Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 5,298 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Understanding how the contents of consciousness, particularly perceptual awareness, change with the progression of AD is crucial for meaningful person-centred care. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BACKGROUNDPeople with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are at higher risk of cerebral small vessel disease and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), potentially contributing to cognitive decline and dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 62 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
16/100
BackgroundClonal haematopoiesis (CH), the age-related expansion of mutated blood stem cells, is detectable in around 10% of people in their seventies, rises steeply with age, and is associated with several diseases. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,091 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
[ 18 F]Tauvid and [ 18 F]MK6240 capture largely overlapping patterns of tau pathology, but differ notably in the magnitude of off-target binding. 3 key findings →
Participants: 681 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Tau PET burden is associated with subsequent cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease, motivating forecasts for monitoring and studies of spatially targeted therapies. 3 key findings →
Participants: 168 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Brain positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is a valuable tool which allows visualization of the pathological structures inside the living patients’ brains. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PVeD reproducibly contextualized associations between plasma pTau217 and PET-defined Alzheimer pathology across cohorts with different participant composition, pTau217 assays, PET tracers, and cognitive measures. 2 key findings →
Participants: 602 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A prespecified structure–reserve–glial profile captured reproducible cognitive variation beyond measured Alzheimer disease molecular pathology across two cohorts. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 436 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 29,380 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 29,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.3% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.3%), 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.
1,037 records (3.5% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →