Subtraction MRI has potential as a visual aid increasing the sensitivity of ARIA-E assessment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 75 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 6 study (NCT05738486) evaluated the effect of different donanemab dosing regimens on amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema/sulcal effusions (ARIA-E). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Baseline medial temporal atrophy was associated with functional decline and microbleeds with ARIA-H. Pretreatment MRI may provide prognostic and safety information during anti-amyloid β therapy. 5 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 40 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In 135 older adults (mean age = 69.3 years; women = 61.5%), no associations were found within AD-signature regions (all p > 0.25). 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There was a significant interaction (P = 0.024) between B vitamin treatment and plasma combined ω-3 fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid) on brain atrophy rates. 5 key findings →
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous findings from the positron emission tomography (PET) substudy of the SCarlet RoAD and Marguerite RoAD open-label extension (OLE) showed gantenerumab doses up to 1200 mg every 4 weeks administered subcutaneously resulted in robust beta-amyloid (Aβ) plaque removal over 24 months in people with prodromal-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Bapineuzumab produced an increase in ventricular volume compared with placebo. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
66/100
Statistically significant effects of AZD0530 treatment were not found on relative CMRgl reduction in an Alzheimer disease-associated region of interest or on secondary clinical or biomarker measures. 3 key findings →
Participants: 159 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Medial temporal lobe atrophy seems to be a more important predictor of cognition than small-vessel disease in MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 896 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Maintaining optimal cognitive functioning throughout the lifespan is a public health priority. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 72 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
Median (IQR) eGFR was 73(60-84) mL/min/1.73 m 2 . 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,334 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Addressing the need for rigorous longitudinal data for the effectiveness of music therapy in people with and at risk for developing AD, this trial aims to enhance knowledge regarding cost-effective interventions with potentially high clinical applicability. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
Our study highlights factors associated with the development of CMHs in individuals with DIAD. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 310 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this real-world cohort of patients treated with lecanemab, ARIAs occurred in nearly one-third of patients. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Encoding-task fMRI was successfully implemented in a single-site, 24-week, AD randomized controlled trial. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ARIA-E is rare in cognitively unimpaired Aβ+ and Aβ- populations prior to anti-amyloid drug intervention. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,250 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Vascular care in patients with Alzheimer disease with cerebrovascular lesions slows progression of WMLs. 2 key findings →
Participants: 123 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
63/100
This is the first study to show that WM integrity is associated with frailty in older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 227 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) occurred in 11.2% (10/89) with lecanemab and 13.3% (11/83) with donanemab-less than in pivotal trials. 5 key findings →
Participants: 89 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ARIA-E risk during aducanumab therapy was influenced by genetic and clinical factors, supporting genotype-tailored titration in practice. 1 key finding →
Participants: 168 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 4413 individuals (mean [SD] age, 71.27 [4.66] years, 2617 women [59.3%]), mean Aβ-PET was elevated in individuals with history of memory impairment in both parents (n = 455; mean [SD] standardized uptake value ratio [SUVR] = 1.12 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5) and in those with only maternal history (n = 1772; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.10 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 2.70 × 10-5) compared with those with only paternal history (n = 632; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.08 [0.18]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5) or no family history (n = 1554; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.08 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 455 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive performance in mild AD improved following tACS, with increased FC within cortical networks and between the hippocampus and specific cortical regions. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 23 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
One hundred two (37.9%) participants were amyloid positive. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 269 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
MI failed to show an effect on metabolism in FDG-based AD biomarker, but exploratory analysis suggested positive effect on limbic system metabolism. 4 key findings →
Participants: 67 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Progressive cerebral volume loss on MRI is a hallmark of Alzheimer's disease and has been widely used as an outcome measure in clinical trials, with the prediction that disease-modifying treatments would slow loss. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study 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
- 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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