27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
EcoXAI replaces monolithic AI text interfaces with an autonomous execution-driven framework with specialized bioinformatics agents for delivering proactive, data-driven insights grounded in established biological knowledge. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults in senior living communities (SLCs) often face barriers to maintaining emotional well-being and family ties. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 90 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Early, scalable detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) remains a global health priority, but non-invasive biomarkers that capture network-level dysfunction during standardized cognitive challenge remain limited. 1 key finding →
Participants: 13 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Wearable devices repeatedly measure activity, sleep, and nocturnal physiology, but their value for three-class cognitive screening remains uncertain. 1 key finding →
Participants: 174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sleeping more than one’s usual average the night before testing was associated with better delayed memory ( β = 0.03, p = 0.02), while no between-person sleep effects emerged. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 329 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a main acquired risk factor for dementia, including Alzheimer disease (AD), but links are unknown. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MedCAT Comorbidity demonstrated predictive ability for mortality (HR 1.11 per condition), although the model fit was better using comorbidity from hospital admission data. 4 key findings →
Participants: 3,543 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia dyads experience substantial informational, emotional, and practical support needs in the early stages of MCI and AD/ADRD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Quantitative analysis of dendritic spine morphology is central to understanding synaptic function and its disruption in neurological disease, yet reliable measurement depends on accurate segmentation of spines from fluorescence microscopy images — a task still limited by faint or discontinuous spine necks and by tools that require extensive manual correction. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by the deposition of amyloid-beta (Aβ) and microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT) neurofibrillary tangles in the brain; however, the molecular mechanisms underlying associated synaptic dysfunction remain unclear. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This interdisciplinary, prototype-centered AI education program was associated with significant short-term improvements in students’ perceived AI knowledge, digital mental health readiness, interdisciplinary collaboration, innovation capacity, STEM career readiness, and solution-design ability. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Strengths and limitations of this study This study evaluates a digitally enabled remote monitoring model for people living with dementia that integrates passive in-home sensors and algorithm-derived digital biomarkers to detect clinically relevant changes such as infection risk, behavioural disturbance and physiological deterioration. 5 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
After more than three decades of intensive research, Alzheimer disease care remains largely palliative, and the field has drawn sustained criticism, both for that reason and for pursuing some directions of inquiry over others. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurodegenerative conditions increasingly adopt digital and assistive technologies in community and home-based settings to support independence, symptom management and quality of life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Symptom chronology emerged as a robust diagnostic discriminator, underscoring the clinical value of temporal disease trajectories. 3 key findings →
Participants: 932 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Wearable devices may facilitate the measurement and treatment of specific BPSD, as well as reduce caregiver burden. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A bstract Deep learning models for electroencephalography (EEG) pathology detection achieve competitive accuracy but offer limited interpretability. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer disease (AD) is a disorder of the nervous system that mostly impacts the brain cells and causes the slow destruction of the brain. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI), and/or diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) are at increased risk for limb loss and death. 3 key findings →
Participants: 178,995 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neuroimaging studies that pool data across clinical sites often suffer from site effects — variability in imaging measures that arises from technical heterogeneity across sites as opposed to true biological signal. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Open-source deep learning models promise scalable quantification of MRI-visible perivascular spaces (PVS), an emerging marker of glymphatic dysfunction in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Subcortical brain alterations are a key feature of dementia disease progression. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Artificial-intelligence (AI) systems for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) increasingly use neuroimaging or spontaneous speech, but reported performance is difficult to interpret across studies because cohorts, endpoints, languages, preprocessing, and validation protocols differ. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Deep learning classifiers trained on structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are increasingly proposed for early detection of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), yet the pipelines that produce these models depend on shared datasets, pre-trained weights, and federated updates that an adversary can poison. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Digital medication-management tools for Alzheimer's disease (AD) typically record only whether a dose was taken, leaving the temporal and behavioral structure of adherence largely unused as a predictive signal. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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.
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
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.
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.
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 →