Factors impacting on time to diagnosis vary with the stage of diagnosis in YOD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 47 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Our findings suggest that poor chewing ability is associated with cognitive impairment or dementia in the elderly living in rural area. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 295 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuropsychological tests showed significant differences between controls and mdMCI, and between controls and eD participants; GPCog, MoCA, PF, and SF also discriminated between controls and aMCI. 5 key findings →
Participants: 96 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The authors studied the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic PD (IPD) in 100 consecutive clinically diagnosed cases that came to neuropathological examination. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
[(11)C]PIB scans were positive in 40 of 66 (61%) patients with a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), 5 of 18 (28%) patients with frontotemporal dementia (FTD), 4 of 5 (80%) patients with Lewy body dementia, and 3 of 10 (30%) patients with other dementias. [(18)F]FDG uptake patterns matched the clinical diagnosis in 38 of 66 (58%) of AD patients, and in 6 of 18 (33%) FTD patients. 4 key findings →
Participants: 39 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early identification of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology is essential for timely intervention, particularly in primary care. 4 key findings →
Participants: 181 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of information accumulated over the past 26 years regarding the psychometric properties and utility of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Although the clinical course of Alzheimer disease (AD) is gradual, it is useful for a number of reasons to distinguish between different levels of severity. 4 key findings →
Participants: 524 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia is an important and increasingly recognized problem in Parkinson's disease (PD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 88 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We report the development and validation of an MDS-based cognitive index, the MDS Cognition Scale (MDS-COGS), by evaluating it against two popular dementia rating scales, the Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 133 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Data sources EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychInfo. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
Specific cutoff scores on the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Logical Memory (LM) test are used to determine inclusion in Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials and diagnostic studies. 4 key findings →
Participants: 23,438 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 88 patients with dementia due to AD from the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort. 4 key findings →
Participants: 88 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sensitive and specific instruments are required to screen for cognitive impairment (CI) in busy clinical practice. 4 key findings →
Participants: 73 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent expansion of proteomic coverage opens unparalleled avenues to unveil new biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
There were 16,708 eligible encounters during the 12-month study period (June 2022-May 2023). 5 key findings →
Participants: 236 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At baseline, there were 126 participants (106 [84.1%] women); mean (SD) age was 44.13 (12.71) years, mean years of interpreting experience was 8.57 (8.48) years, and 106 of 120 (88.3%) lived in an urban area. 5 key findings →
Participants: 126 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundIndividuals with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of developing both vascular and Alzheimer's dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 128 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Random forest classifier and feature selection procedures were used to select digital biomarkers. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,324 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
11 variables were critical in the training phase, including educational level, depression, insomnia, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), medication count, gender, stenting, systolic blood pressure (sbp), neurosis and rapid eye movement. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,379 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 893 participants with average age 93 years (range 90-102), 43 % had SMC. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 893 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a year-long, home-based individual cognitive stimulation (iCS) program on cognitive performance, mood, functional independence, and quality of life (QoL) in older adults with mild Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 18 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our aim is to examine the interplay between cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD) pathology, Alzheimer’s disease (AD) related amyloid-β (Aβ) clearance, and cognition in general population. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,026 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
52/100
Scores on the full and abbreviated versions of the MoCA can be linked directly to the MMSE. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 199 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
10 of the 1,775 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 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
- Deep Learning-Based Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease
- Visinin-like protein-1: diagnostic and prognostic biomarker in Alzheimer disease
- A Machine Learning-Based Framework for differential screening of Neurodegenerative Dementias using routine clinical data
- Increasing participant diversity in AD research: Plans for digital screening, blood testing, and a community-engaged approach in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 4
- Deep ensemble learning of sparse regression models for brain disease diagnosis
- Accuracy of Tau Positron Emission Tomography as a Prognostic Marker in Preclinical and Prodromal Alzheimer Disease: A Head-to-Head Comparison Against Amyloid Positron Emission Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- The assessment of cognitive function in advanced HIV-1 infection and AIDS dementia complex using a new computerised cognitive test battery
- Plasma P-tau181 in Alzheimer's disease: relationship to other biomarkers, differential diagnosis, neuropathology and longitudinal progression to Alzheimer's dementia
- Role of apolipoprotein E (ApoE) ε4 in cognitive impairment after a stroke: a prospective cohort study
- Diagnosis, pathomechanisms and therapy of cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related inflammation (CAA-ri)
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.
1,034 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 →