The COACH system shows promise as a tool to help support older adults with moderate-levels of dementia and their caregivers. 3 key findings →
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.
The high failure rate of clinical trials in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and AD-related dementia (ADRD) is due to a lack of understanding of the pathophysiology of disease, and this deficit may be addressed by applying artificial intelligence (AI) to "big data" to rapidly and effectively expand therapeutic development efforts. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Gait is emerging as a potential diagnostic tool for cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The dCDT is able to operationally define graphomotor output that cannot be measured using traditional paper and pencil test administration in older health controls and participants with dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 175 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Lysosome dysfunction arises early and propels Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The aggregation of Aβ42-peptides and the formation of drusen in age-related macular degeneration (AMD) are due in part to the inability of homeostatic phagocytic mechanisms to clear self-aggregating Aβ42-peptides from the extracellular space. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Pilot studies applying a humanoid robot (NAO), a pet robot (PARO) and a real animal (DOG) in therapy sessions of patients with dementia in a nursing home and a day care center. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 101 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
The AI-powered pipeline achieved robust performance with intraclass correlation coefficients exceeding 0.97 for regional uptake estimation compared with MR-based ground truth. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 666 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PWAbS revealed elevated gross autoantibody levels in AD and DLB patients compared to CNIs. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 35 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
Our findings indicate that using location-based trajectory metrics with clinical measures significantly improves the predictability of motor agitation beyond individual baselines. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Model scores two standard deviations below the mean had 4 months increased survival (two standard deviations below had 3 months decreased survival). 5 key findings →
Participants: 802 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
Dementia, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD), presents a growing global health challenge characterized by cognitive decline, behavioral changes, and loss of independence. 1 key finding →
Participants: 2,878 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The progressive nature of dementia necessitates early detection strategies capable of identifying preclinical cognitive decline. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia research often suffers from methodological pitfalls such as label-information and subject-information leakages. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study developed machine learning models to predict Aβ positivity in Alzheimer’s disease by integrating early-phase 18 F-Florbetaben PET and clinical data to improve diagnostic accuracy. 2 key findings →
Participants: 176 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Isolated rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) is a major prodromal marker of α-synucleinopathies, often preceding the clinical onset of Parkinson's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, or multiple system atrophy. 3 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
The optimized XGBoost model demonstrated superior performance, achieving an AUC of 0.85. 5 key findings →
Participants: 17,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The fall detection system detected 12 out of 15 real-life falls, having a sensitivity of 80.0%, with a false alarm rate of 0.049 alarms per usage hour with the implemented real-time system. 3 key findings →
Participants: 15,500 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Overall, the results suggest that ARC is reliable and valid and represents a feasible tool for assessing cognitive changes associated with the earliest stages of AD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Repeated smartphone-assisted cognitive testing is feasible with reasonable adherence and moderate relative validity for the Stroop and the Trail Making tests compared with conventional neuropsychological tests. 3 key findings →
Participants: 151 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Detecting early signs of cognitive decline is crucial for early detection and treatment of Alzheimer's Disease. 3 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found patient and care partner input to be critical throughout the development process for early identification of design and usability issues and for identifying solutions not previously considered by our research team. 2 key findings →
Participants: 13 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
BrainCheck was able to distinguish between diagnoses of dementia, MCI, and NC, providing a potentially reliable tool for early detection of cognitive impairment. 1 key finding →
Participants: 99 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although there were no significant changes in caregiver burden, we were encouraged by the increased emotional well-being of our participants following the completion of our program. 4 key findings →
Participants: 21 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Accurate and early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) plays important role for patient care and development of future treatment. 1 key finding →
Participants: 397 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
10 of the 1,109 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.
- Detection of emergency department patients at risk of dementia through artificial intelligence
- Feasibility and Acceptability of Implementing a Digital Cognitive Assessment for Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias in Primary Care
- An integrated Artificial Intelligence and optimization model for operational efficiency and risk reduction in Letter of Credit examination process
- A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Process of Copying a Complex Figure in Early- and Late-Onset Alzheimer Disease: A Quantitative Analysis of Digital Pen Data
- Etomidate ameliorates Alzheimer-like neuropathology and cognitive impairment in APP/PS1 mice
- Breaking Social Isolation Amidst COVID‐19: A Viewpoint on Improving Access to Technology in Long‐Term Care Facilities
- AI on Alzheimer Disease: Large-Scale Reproduction Shows the Field’s Hypotheses Cannot Be Distinguished on Common Data
- Automatic mandibular third molar and mandibular canal relationship determination based on deep learning models for preoperative risk reduction
- Can objective measures of physical activity and sleep serve as early predictors of dementia among individuals with cognitive impairment?
- Brain-targeting liposome-based APOE2 gene delivery exacerbates soluble amyloid-β accumulation in App NL-G-F mice
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 →