31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Plasma pTau217 is effective for predicting A/T biomarker profile and cognitive decline, though further study is needed to better explain its association with Aβ and tau PET staging. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,919 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent advancements in biomarkers have transformed Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis from being purely symptom-based to include biological criteria. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,448 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The mean (SD) age of the 842 participants in cohort 1 was 72 (5.6) years, with a range of 59 to 88 years, and 446 (52.5%) were female. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 842 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Baseline plasma GFAP could detect abnormal CSF Aβ42/40 and CSF Aβ42/T-tau with an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.72-0.86) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.72-0.86), respectively. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Identifying a clinical distinction between the invariably lethal prion disease Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) and nonprion rapidly progressive dementias is important and sometimes difficult; thus, reliable tools for diagnosis are in great demand. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 30 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 and Aβ42/Aβ38 ratios are significantly better than CSF Aβ42 to detect brain amyloid deposition in prodromal AD and to differentiate AD dementia from non-AD dementias. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,182 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Comparable diagnostic performances and strong correlations between serum versus plasma pairs suggest that p-tau analyses can be expanded to research cohorts and hospital systems that prefer serum to other blood matrices. 5 key findings →
Participants: 115 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Blood biomarkers are rapidly becoming established for Alzheimer's Disease (AD) diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Participants: 174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical markers (biomarkers) Amyloidβ 42 (Aβ 42 ), total Tau (T-tau) and Tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau 181 ) have proven diagnostic accuracy for mild cognitive impairment and dementia due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
As the leading cause of dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major burden on affected individuals, their families and caregivers, and healthcare systems. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Low levels of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) beta-amyloid 1-42 (Abeta42) and high total tau (T-tau) are diagnostic for manifest Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease (AD) have the potential to allow early and more accurate diagnosis, predict disease progression, stratify individuals and track response to candidate therapies in drug trials. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Novel and established cerebrospinal fluid markers perform with at least fair accuracy in the discrimination between ADD and FTD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 41 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study suggests that the level of Aβ38 can potentially contribute in the diagnostic distinction between AD and DLB when combined with Aβ42. 3 key findings →
Participants: 85 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Depressed individuals are twice as likely to develop Alzheimer's disease (AD) as compared to controls. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Human stem cell models have the potential to provide platforms for phenotypic screens to identify candidate treatments and cellular pathways involved in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This article gives an updated account of the clinical application of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers for Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Following the development of the first methods to measure the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers total-tau (T-tau), phosphorylated tau (P-tau) and the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-β (Aβ42), there has been an enormous expansion of this scientific research area. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Accumulating data from the clinical research support that the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers amyloid-β (Aβ42), total tau (T-tau), and phosphorylated tau (P-tau) reflect key elements of AD pathophysiology. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Test-retest reliability measures are essential for interpretation of meaningful effects over time for plasma and digital outcomes. 1 key finding →
Participants: 92 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 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.
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