30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Parietal cortex RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) data were generated from individuals with and without Alzheimer disease (AD; n control = 13; n AD = 83) from the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data from 3960 MRI sessions among 1141 participants were included: 252 pathogenic variant carriers from DIAN (mean [SD] age, 38.4 [11.2] years; 137 [54%] female), 571 older adults from ADNI (mean [SD] age, 72.8 [7.3] years; 274 [48%] female), and 318 older adults from HABS (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [7.6] years; 194 [61%] female). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,141 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this cohort study, high adherence to a flavonoid-rich diet score was associated with a lower risk of dementia, with reductions more pronounced in individuals with a high genetic risk, hypertension, and depressive symptoms. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 121,986 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
However, the extent to which increasing age, Aβ, and ε4 are associated with memory decline remains unclear, and the age at which memory decline begins for Aβ-positive ε4 carriers and noncarriers has not been determined. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,583 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are likely to be most beneficial when initiated in the presymptomatic phase. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 567 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Aβ deposition increases slowly from cognitive normality to moderate severity DAT. 5 key findings →
Participants: 206 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Due to trisomy of chromosome 21 and the resultant extra copy of the amyloid precursor protein gene, nearly all adults with Down syndrome develop Alzheimer's disease pathology by the age of 40 years and are at high risk for dementia given their increased life expectancy compared with adults with Down syndrome in the past. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 41 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Analysis of cross-sectional data from the AIBL study indicates that plasma apoE levels are altered in AD and correlate with AD pathology level. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,079 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Resting-state functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging changes with progressing AD severity are similar between ADAD and LOAD. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 79 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid PET imaging has been crucial for detecting the accumulation of amyloid beta (Aβ) deposits in the brain and to study Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 13,409 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We present a comprehensive global analysis of genetic variants associated with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease (ADAD). 2 key findings →
Participants: 550 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The extent to which the pathophysiology of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease corresponds to the pathophysiology of 'sporadic' late onset Alzheimer's disease is unknown, thus limiting the extrapolation of study findings and clinical trial results in autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease to late onset Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Participants: 559 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the advent of technologies that allow simultaneous genotyping of thousands of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) across the genome, the genetic contributions to complex diseases can be explored at an unprecedented detail. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Although pathogenic variants in PSEN1 leading to autosomal-dominant Alzheimer disease (ADAD) are highly penetrant, substantial interindividual variability in the rates of cognitive decline and biomarker change are observed in ADAD. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Observational Study (DIAN Obs) is a longitudinal, global cohort study investigating brain aging and autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease (ADAD), a rare monogenic form of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a chronic neurodegenerative disease characterised by cognitive impairment, behavioural alteration, and functional decline. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events