27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Most people's cognitive abilities decline with age, with significant and partly genetically driven, individual differences in rate of change. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,087 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alongside APOE ε4, iPRS-DEM may refine risk stratification for the enrichment of dementia clinical trials and prevention programs. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 241,935 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APOE4 is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a frequent problem encountered in advanced stages of Parkinson disease (PD). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In ADNI, Aβ-positive participants showed more decline than did Aβ-negative participants with regard to the ADCS-PACC score at 24 months (mean [SE] difference, -1.239 [0.522] [95% CI, -2.263 to -0.215]; P = .02). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Estimates of AD disease duration become more accurate if age, sex, setting, APOE, and cerebrospinal fluid tau are taken into account. 2 key findings →
Participants: 3,268 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results suggest that the inheritance of APOE epsilon 4 is associated with reduced cerebral parietal metabolism and increased asymmetry in non-demented relatives at risk for probable AD. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 12 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
High Aβ participants were more likely to be APOE ε4+ than low Aβ participants. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In white older adults, prevalent Alzheimer disease (AD) was longitudinally associated with a reduced risk of cancer, and a history of cancer was associated with a reduced risk of AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,020 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
We found that longitudinal changes in cognitive function measured by the cognitive composite decreased at low and high values of total sleep time (P < 0.001), time in non-REM (P < 0.001) and REM sleep (P < 0.001), sleep efficiency (P < 0.01) and <1 Hz and 1-4.5 Hz non-REM slow wave activity (P < 0.001) even after adjusting for age, CSF total tau/amyloid-β42 ratio, APOE ε4 carrier status, years of education and sex. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 100 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 is the single most important genetic risk factor for cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease (AD), while lifestyle factors such as smoking, drinking, diet, and physical activity also have impact on cognition. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the 286 autopsied brains of 544 participants, brain mercury levels were positively correlated with the number of seafood meals consumed per week (ρ = 0.16; P = .02). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 286 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
All synaptic biomarkers tested had a good discriminatory power to distinguish patients with AD abnormal CSF from those with non-AD disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 81 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The genetic component of early-onset Alzheimer disease (EOAD), accounting for ~10% of all Alzheimer's disease (AD) cases, is largely unexplained. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 19,668 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Apolipoprotein E, type epsilon 4 allele (APOE epsilon 4), is associated with late-onset familial Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APOE shows a heterogeneous effect on ADRD risk in our Hispanics/Latinos sample, the largest to date. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control Participants: 12,221 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Better sleep consolidation attenuates the effect of APOE genotype on incident AD and development of neurofibrillary tangle pathology. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 698 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Two multicentre genome-wide association (GWA) studies provided substantial evidence, implicating the complement receptor 1 gene (CR1) in Alzheimer disease (AD) genetic etiology. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,883 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results support the hypothesis that the appearance of WMH follows age and disease-dependent regional distribution patterns, potentially influenced by differential underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms, and possibly with a differential link to vascular and neurodegenerative changes. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,836 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Protection from these ADP factors may be important for aging without significant ADP. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 423 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Worldwide, the prevalence of dementia is increasing and diet as a modifiable factor could play a role. 3 key findings →
Participants: 493,888 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Genetic risk factors of AD dementia demonstrate effects related to Aβ, as well as synergistic interactions with Aβ. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 702 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Secondary analysis suggested that this effect may be driven primarily by individuals who are negative for the established AD genetic risk factor, apolipoprotein E (APOE) ɛ4. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 346 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the evaluated parameters, the only significant predictor of conversion to AD was non-Cp copper (hazard ratio = 1.23, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-1.47, p = 0.022); for each additional micromole per liter unit (μmol/l) of non-Cp copper, the hazard increased by ~20%. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 →