27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
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
Alzheimer's disease (AD) therapies utilizing amyloid-β (Aβ) immunization have shown potential in clinical trials. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Serum NfL concentration is increased in FAD prior to symptom onset and correlates with measures of disease stage and severity. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 48 Evidence: low
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
We suggest that 6 months of dietary n-3 FA supplementation affected expression of genes that might influence inflammatory processes and could be of significance for AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 16 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Disclosure of pleiotropic information did not increase anxiety or depression and may have decreased distress among persons at increased risk for 2 conditions. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this Seminar, we highlight the main developments in the field of Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Understanding how metabolites are longitudinally influenced by age and sex could facilitate the identification of metabolomic profiles and trajectories that indicate disease risk. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,212 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Stroke, dementia, and hypertension are associated with late-onset epilepsy; however, the role of other vascular and lifestyle factors remains unclear. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 792 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings show that frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is a highly heritable disorder but heritability varies between the different syndromes. 2 key findings →
Participants: 225 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Rates of hippocampal atrophy (%/year) were 0.0 +/- 0.8 in the absent, 1.7 +/- 0.4 in the moderate, and 3.6 +/- 1.0 in the severe (mean +/- SD) tertile. 2 key findings →
Participants: 323 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In response to KKM treatment, 68 genes were found to be differentially expressed (19 up-regulated, 49 down-regulated) after adjusting for potentially confounded differences in sex, illness burden, and BMI. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Most healthy elderly people did not experience cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,201 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) has been identified as the major disease protein in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration with ubiquitin inclusions (FTLD-U), defining a novel class of neurodegenerative conditions: the TDP-43 proteinopathies. 3 key findings →
Participants: 296 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
10 of the 3,521 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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 →