Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis relies on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers or amyloid PET. 1 key finding →
Participants: 134 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.
Female gender, older age, and lower levels of education were associated with poorer overall test scores. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vision impairment is common among older adults and affects dementia screening assessments, which include visually presented items. 5 key findings →
Participants: 86 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early detection of cognitive decline in older adults is essential for implementing timely interventions. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 90 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings support speech-based cognitive assessments as a promising avenue towards remote MCI screening, with implications for scalable screening in clinical trials and healthcare. 3 key findings →
Participants: 110 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the top 20 acoustic features, our framework achieved classification accuracies of 62.2% (EER: 0.3335) on the FHS dataset for NC, MCI, and DE differentiation, and 63.7% (EER: 0.1796) on the DBD dataset for NC and MCI differentiation, using obfuscated speech files. 5 key findings →
Participants: 128 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuropsychological interviews and neuroimaging techniques are traditional diagnostic methods for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This longitudinal evidence supports a link between the ALPS-I and cognitive degeneration. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
48/100
Measures of cognition were especially important predictive features of clinical diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Key markers and mechanisms were identified for each stage: initial neurophysiological deficits in SCD with compensatory metabolomic responses, gut-brain axis dysregulation in MCI, and extensive metabolic disruption and multisystem breakdown in AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 277 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MDS varied significantly by age, sex, education, and language of administration even among participants with normal cognition. 5 key findings →
Participants: 25,330 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Whole-brain bm-CVR values were significantly associated with the diagnosis group of normal, MCI, and early dementia (β = -3.00%/mm Hg, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-5.42, -0.58]), and were lower in the impaired participants relative to participants with normal cognition (β = -2.18, CI [-3.91, -0.45]). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 36 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundOdor identification deficits predict Alzheimer's disease (AD) in epidemiological studies. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 600 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia is introduced.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This paper proposes a new approach to automatically detect dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 29 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
Dementia and delirium were prevalent, yet under-recognized, in acute medical geriatric inpatients. 3 key findings →
Participants: 144 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This mass spectrometry-based plasma biomarker test: has strong diagnostic performance; can accurately distinguish brain amyloid positive from amyloid negative individuals; may aid in the diagnostic evaluation process for Alzheimer's disease; and may enhance the efficiency of enrolling participants into Alzheimer's disease drug trials. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It is possible to create a blood-based screening algorithm that works across both serum and plasma that provides a comparable screening accuracy to that obtained from CSF analyses. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Digital assessments are effective at identifying at-risk individuals, supporting their utility as low-burden tools for early AD detection and monitoring. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We investigated whether a validated computerized cognitive test, the Computerized Assessment of Mild Cognitive Impairment (CAMCI), could be independently completed by older primary care patients. 1 key finding →
Participants: 130 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In both the British and French studies, ten health conditions were significantly positively associated with increased Alzheimer's disease risk, in a window of exposure from 2-10 years before Alzheimer's disease diagnosis, comprising major depressive disorder (UK OR 1·34, 95% CI 1·23-1·46; France OR 1·73, 1·57-1·91), anxiety (UK OR 1·36, 1·25-1·47; France OR 1·50, 1·36-1·65), reaction to severe stress and adjustment disorders (UK OR 1·40, 1·24-1·59; France OR 1·83, 1·55-2·15), hearing loss (UK OR 1·19, 1·11-1·28; France OR 1·51, 1·21-1·89), constipation (UK OR 1·31, 1·22-1·41; France OR 1·59, 1·44-1·75), spondylosis (UK OR 1·26, 1·14-1·39; France OR 1·62, 1·44-1·81), abnormal weight loss (UK OR 1·47, 1·33-1·63; France OR 1·88, 1·56-2·26), malaise and fatigue (UK OR 1·23, 1·14-1·32; France OR 1·59, 1·46-1·73), memory loss (UK OR 7·63, 6·65-8·76; France OR 4·41, 3·07-6·34), and syncope and collapse (UK OR 1·23, 1·10-1·37; France OR 1·57, 1·26-1·96). 4 key findings →
Participants: 214 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Normalized thickness index at baseline differed significantly among all the four diagnosis groups (P < 0.001) and correctly distinguished Alzheimer's disease patients from healthy controls with an 85% cross-validated accuracy. 2 key findings →
Participants: 122 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
By using fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET of the brain, a deep learning algorithm developed for early prediction of Alzheimer disease achieved 82% specificity at 100% sensitivity, an average of 75.8 months prior to the final diagnosis. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,002 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In the field of computer-aided Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis, jointly identifying brain diseases and predicting clinical scores using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have attracted increasing attention since these two tasks are highly correlated. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,984 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
Nonrigid image registration is an important, but time-consuming task in medical image analysis. 1 key finding →
Participants: 299 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.
- Risks and Benefits of Screening for Dementia in Primary Care: The Indiana University Cognitive Health Outcomes Investigation of the Comparative Effectiveness of Dementia Screening (IU CHOICE)Trial
- The relationship between neuroinflammation and clinical features of dementia: An investigation of GFAP levels in Alzheimer's disease and related disorders
- The impact of early dementia diagnosis and intervention on informal caregivers
- MMSE-Based Dementia Prediction: Deep vs. Traditional Models
- Machine Learning-Based Framework for Differential Diagnosis Between Vascular Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease Using Structural MRI Features
- Potential impact of amyloid imaging on diagnosis and intended management in patients with progressive cognitive decline
- Four sensitive screening tools to detect cognitive dysfunction in geriatric emergency department patients: brief Alzheimer's Screen, Short Blessed Test, Ottawa 3DY, and the caregiver-completed AD8
- [Amyloid positron-emission-tomography with [18 F]-florbetaben in the diagnostic workup of dementia patients]
- Plasma phosphorylated tau 217 and phosphorylated tau 181 as biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal lobar degeneration: a retrospective diagnostic performance study
- Predicting White Matter Hyperintensity: Leveraging Portable MRI for Accessible Brain Health Screening
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 →