Alzheimer disease (AD) is one of the most common diseases among the older adults. 5 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of combined NF-acupuncture therapy, and expect that it will serve as the basis for the use of NF together with acupuncture in the clinical setting. 1 key finding →
Participants: 22 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Published results from the AN1792 trial may have underestimated the effect of vaccine on progression of cerebral atrophy among patients with an antibody response to the vaccine. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These findings suggest that at current expected prices, neither aducanumab nor donanemab would be cost-effective for early AD in the US. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
AN1792 + QS-21 elicited a positive antibody response to Abeta42 in more than half of this elderly study population. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Electrophysiology Professional Interest Area (EPIA) and Global Brain Consortium endorsed recommendations on candidate electroencephalography (EEG) measures for Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The long-term efficacy of amyloid-targeting therapies hinges on their ability to slow downstream neuropathologic change, but little is known about the influence of amyloid clearance on tau pathology and neurodegeneration. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium is common and often goes undetected in older patients admitted to medical services. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,925 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Identifying clinical measures that track disease in the earliest stages of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is important for clinical trials. 4 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ReDeSign provides dementia training to convenience store workers and contributes to developing an inclusive community for people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 62 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Incentives are a cornerstone of attracting and retaining participants in clinical research studies.1 They serve as compensation for the time and effort individuals dedicate to the research process.1 However, previous randomized clinical trials found incentivizing was not associated with increased rates of clinical trial recruitment.2, 3 Furthermore, the rate participants redeem these incentives can vary considerably.1, 4 Although numerous methods have been used to increase trial recruitment, no studies have been conducted to explore factors associated with incentive redemption, regardless of clinical area. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 586 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The primary outcome of this study will be the total score on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 65 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Both groups exhibited significant, transient microbiome remodeling at Year 1 (the period of most active weight loss). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with the control arm (n = 36), the TEAM-V Program (n = 39) was associated with significantly improved general cognition (MoCA, P = 0.02) at 2 years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 40 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the 92 participants in the ITT population (mean age 71.9 years; mean education 16.5 years; 61/92, 66%, women; 88/92, 96%, White), 82 (89%) completed all study activities. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 92 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The MAINTAIN intervention demonstrated high fidelity in home assessments and intervention delivery, with participants receiving a mean of 15 of the 22 available sessions with a range of 5-25 sessions. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An important goal of advance care planning (ACP) is ensuring that patients receive care concordant with their preferences. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older adults with cognitive decline are vulnerable to various health problems. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 147 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aimed to identify lipid species associated with MPH response and explore lipid pathway disruptions in responders versus non-responders. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this short-term study in patients with Alzheimer's disease who were selected for apparent responsiveness to tacrine, treatment with tacrine resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the decline of cognitive function, although this reduction was not large enough to be detected by the study physicians' global assessments of the patients. 5 key findings →
Participants: 215 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
54/100
Serum concentrations of semorinemab were consistent across studies and showed a dose-proportional increase across the evaluated dose range. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 8,430 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The outcomes of the present study aim to elucidate the significance of the PDE4 inhibition mechanism as a prospective therapeutic target for enhancing cognitive function in individuals with (a)MCI and mild AD dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of depressive symptoms, cognitive functions, and ADL. 5 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In trials of lecanemab, aducanumab, and donanemab, incidence of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with active treatment ranged from 22% to 44%, the vast majority of which presumably led to unblinding. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The authors estimated the effects of each of the three commonly used drugs for Alzheimer disease (donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine) in terms of predefined clinical outcomes and trial completion rates, by dosing level, and described differences among them. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
From across this tag
9 of the 1,875 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 9. The same 9 appear here every time.
- Blood Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease Neuropathology, Cognition, and Response to a Multidomain Lifestyle Intervention: Secondary analysis of the FINGER Randomized Controlled Dementia Risk Reduction Trial
- A randomized, controlled trial of linopirdine in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease
- Cognitive effects of treating obstructive sleep apnea in Alzheimer's disease: a randomized controlled study
- The antipsychotic discontinuation in Alzheimer disease trial: clinical rationale and study design
- Clinical trial of indomethacin in Alzheimer's disease
- Tau and neurodegenerative disease: the story so far
- Longitudinal assessment of tau and amyloid beta in cerebrospinal fluid of Parkinson disease
- Alzheimer's Disease: Key Insights from Two Decades of Clinical Trial Failures
- A Phase IIa clinical trial to evaluate the effects of anti-retroviral therapy in Alzheimer's disease (ART-AD)
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →