Our results suggest that genes associated with clinical neurological disease also have detectable effects on subclinical phenotypes. 5 key findings →
Participants: 705 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
52/100
Plasma and CSF p-tau 217 had equivalent diagnostic performance for biomarker-defined AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is currently incurable, but there is general agreement that a minimally invasive blood biomarker for screening in preclinical stages would be crucial for future therapy. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Repetitive head trauma is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease and is the primary cause of chronic traumatic encephalopathy. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The ICA demonstrated convergent validity with MoCA (Pearson r=0.58, p<0.0001) and ACE (r=0.62, p<0.0001). 5 key findings →
Participants: 230 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Differences in expressing facial emotions are broadly observed in people with cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 493 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previous studies have shown that the diagnostic performance of digital cognitive tests is comparable with that of conventional paper-and-pencil tests. 3 key findings →
Participants: 54 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PiB and FDG showed similar accuracy in discriminating AD and FTLD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 62 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The objective of this study was to assess the convergent validity of a 26-point Telephone Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in a longitudinal cohort of 46 Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Extended monitoring detects subclinical epileptiform activity in a substantial proportion of patients with AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 33 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Analysis showed strong correlation between (1) XpressO memory tasks scores and the MoCA Memory Index Score (p-values < 0.001), and between (2) XpressO sub-test scores and MoCA total score (p-values < 0.005). 5 key findings →
Participants: 118 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 406 FHS (Framingham Heart Study) and 59 BHS (Bogalusa Heart Study) participants with traditional neuropsychological tests and digital assessments using the Defense Automated Neurocognitive Assessment (DANA) smartphone protocol were included. 5 key findings →
Participants: 406 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
52/100
Pupillometry is a measurement of pupil dilation commonly performed as part of neurological assessments. 1 key finding →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The SCST total score, cognitive domain scores (attention, language, visuospatial function, memory, executive function), and most of the subtest scores decreased significantly in the order of SCD, MCI and dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 254 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Reimbursement of amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) is lagging due to the lack of definitive evidence on its clinical utility and cost-effectiveness. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Concomitant LATE-NC and vascular pathology were equally common, and cognition was equally impaired, in PART (Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] = 24.8 ± 6.9) and ADNC (MMSE = 24.2 ± 6.0). 5 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among the included 3 515 329 Medicare fee-for-service decedents, when adjusted for age and sex, the percentage of older decedents with an ADRD diagnosis increased from 34.7% in 2004 to 47.2% in 2017. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Crenezumab is a humanized anti-amyloid-beta (Aβ) monoclonal IgG4 antibody in development for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 500 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To investigate the association between serum neurofilament light chain (NfL) levels, inflammatory cytokines, and cognitive function to assess their utility in the early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We established AD diagnostic models using plasma biomarkers for Chinese participants. 2 key findings →
Participants: 159 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
After disclosure, 27 patients with amyloid-positive SCD+ (median [IQR] age, 70 [66-74] years; gender: 14 men [52%]; median [IQR] education: 15 [13 to 17] years, median [IQR] Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] score, 29 [28 to 30]) had higher median (IQR) IES-R total score (10 [2 to 14] vs 0 [0 to 2]; P Conclusions and relevance The disclosure of a positive amyloid-PET result to patients with SCD+ was associated with a bigger psychological change, yet such change did not reach the threshold for clinical concern. 5 key findings →
Participants: 27 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
51/100
Determining blood biomarkers represents less invasive and less costly diagnostics for Alzheimer´s disease. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Approximately 40% of the subjects were APOE epsilon4 carriers. 2 key findings →
Participants: 494 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Of 214 participants, 48 showed no decline on any test, 126 showed decline on only 1 test in 1 or more domains, and 40 showed decline on 2 or more tests in 1 or more domains. 2 key findings →
Participants: 214 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This is the first study to investigate urine biomarker through exercise intervention. 3 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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.
- Large-scale CSF proteome profiling identifies biomarkers for accurate diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia
- Early detection of Alzheimer's disease using MRI hippocampal texture
- Improving Gait Ability and Cognition Function through Action Observation Training in Elderly with Dementia
- A blood screening tool for detecting mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease among community-dwelling Mexican Americans and non-Hispanic Whites: A method for increasing representation of diverse populations in clinical research
- The Mini-Mental State Examination in the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease
- Detection of Mild Cognitive Impairment Through Natural Language and Touchscreen Typing Processing
- The 2022 symposium on dementia and brain aging in low- and middle-income countries: Highlights on research, diagnosis, care, and impact
- Fast parallel image registration on CPU and GPU for diagnostic classification of Alzheimer's disease
- Home-based caregiver training: Benefits differ by care receivers' dementia diagnosis
- Recent diagnostic techniques for the detection of Alzheimer's disease: a short review
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 →