Median survival was much lower than in screened populations. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate
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.
66/100
Men, racial and ethnic minority individuals, older adults, and those with language barriers are at increased risk for undertreatment of depression. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A MoCA cutoff score of 23, rather than the initially recommended score of 26, lowers the false positive rate and shows overall better diagnostic accuracy. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ABSTRACTObjective:To compare the accuracy of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in tracking mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
66/100
Plasma p-tau biomarkers had a greater diagnostic performance and larger effect sizes compared to t-tau and Aβ42/40 assays in detecting Aβ pathology. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 197 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Adherence was high (82.2%) and usability favorable. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,815 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Altered functional connectivity precedes structural brain changes and symptoms in dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The sample included 1 626 127 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 80.1 [8.0] years; 922 194 women [56.7%]) who received diagnoses of the 4 conditions in 2016. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The mechanism of injury was a fall in 1 228 847 incidents (50.1%). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 2,453,655 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
When proper normative values are used, only age and education, and not race or ethnicity, are associated with higher frequency of MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
65/100
Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The MMSE is the most widely used cognitive test but its accuracy and clinical utility in diagnosing cognitive disorders is not fully known. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Plasma p-tau217 and p-tau181 were correlated (r=0·90, p diff =0·31) and in pathology-confirmed Alzheimer's disease (n=15, mean age 73 years [SD 12]) versus pathologically confirmed FTLD (n=68, mean age 67 years [SD 8]; AUC=0·96 [0·92-1·00] for p-tau217, AUC=0·91 [0·82-1·00] for p-tau181; p diff =0·22). 4 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MoCA and MMSE were more similar for dementia cases, but MoCA distributes MCI cases across a broader score range with less ceiling effect. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 219 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A number of new recommendations and good practice points are made, namely in CSF, neuropsychology, neuroimaging and reviewing non-evidence based therapies. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The advent of proteomics offers an unprecedented opportunity to predict dementia onset. 1 key finding →
Participants: 52,645 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Educational support for general practitioners should concentrate on epidemiological knowledge, disclosure of the diagnosis and management of behaviour problems in dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
65/100
Most studies have focused on dementia and suicidal behavior, with inconsistent results. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 21 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
65/100
Baseline CSF levels of NGRN in patients with AD (median level, 2381 pg/mL [interquartile range, 1651-3416 pg/mL]) were higher than in cognitively normal participants (median level, 1712 pg/mL [interquartile range, 1206-2724 pg/mL]) (P = .04). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 163 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this longitudinal study, we included 396 cognitively normal to dementia subjects with 18 F-Florbetapir/ 18 F-Florbetaben-amyloid-PET, 18 F-Flortaucipir-tau-PET and ~ 2-year cognitive follow-up. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 396 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients with Alzheimer dementia from the Swedish Dementia Registry starting on ChEIs within 3 months of the dementia diagnosis were included and compared to nontreated patients with Alzheimer dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 11,652 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is an increasingly used screening tool for cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 710 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study classified preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) using cognitive screening, neighborhood deprivation via the area deprivation index (ADI), and sociodemographic and genetic risk factors. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,792 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The diagnostic performance of plasma biomarkers was poor (area under the curve [AUC] between 0·53 [95% CI 0·44-0·62] and 0·74 [0·66-0·82]) except for plasma NfL concentrations, which had an AUC of 0·88 (0·82-0·93) for the differentiation of the asymptomatic group versus the prodromal Alzheimer's disease group and 0·95 (0·92-0·98) for the asymptomatic group versus the Alzheimer's disease dementia group. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 282 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Higher levels of P-tau181 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 1.17-1.51]), NfL (HR = 1.19 [95% CI: 1.03-1.36]), and GFAP (HR = 1.36 [95% CI: 1.22-1.52]), and a lower Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio (HR = 0.80 [95% CI: 0.68-0.95]) were associated with an increased risk of progressing to clinically-diagnosed DAT. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,007 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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.
- Vascular cognitive disorder: a new diagnostic category updating vascular cognitive impairment and vascular dementia
- Unrecognized Cognitive Impairment and Its Effect on Heart Failure Readmissions of Elderly Adults
- Tablet-Based Automatic Assessment for Early Detection of Alzheimer's Disease Using Speech Responses to Daily Life Questions
- Psychiatric morbidity in terminally ill cancer patients. A prospective study
- Focus groups on digital cognitive assessment in the context of Alzheimer's disease
- Recommendations for the use of PET imaging biomarkers in the diagnosis of neurodegenerative conditions associated with dementia: SEMNIM and SEN consensus
- Psychometric properties of International HIV Dementia Scale as screening tool for neurocognitive disorder among people living with HIV/AIDS
- Public health strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma: from risk factors to prevention and control
- Research criteria for the diagnosis of prodromal dementia with Lewy bodies
- Consensus guidelines for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB): report of the Consortium on DLB International Workshop
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 →