27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This was, at the time, the largest genetic study of Alzheimer's disease ever done, comparing DNA from over 111,000 people with the disease (or a strong family history) to nearly 680,000 people without it. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 788,989 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
With no effective treatments for cognitive decline or dementia, improving the evidence base for modifiable risk factors is a research priority. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 48,522 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found a sequence to pathological changes, with rates of Aβ deposition in mutation carriers being significantly different from those in non-carriers first (across regions that showed a significant difference, at a mean of 18·9 years [SD 3·3] before expected onset), followed by hypometabolism (14·1 years [5·1] before expected onset), and lastly structural decline (4·7 years [4·2] before expected onset). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 346 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Leisure-time physical activity at midlife at least twice a week was associated with a reduced risk of dementia and AD (odds ratio [OR] 0.48 [95% CI 0.25-0.91] and 0.38 [0.17-0.85], respectively), even after adjustments for age, sex, education, follow-up time, locomotor disorders, APOE genotype, vascular disorders, smoking, and alcohol drinking. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,449 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Decades of research have revealed numerous risk factors for mental disorders beyond genetics, but their consistency and magnitude remain uncer-tain. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 176 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Using cross-population GWAS meta-analyses, we identify novel LOAD susceptibility loci in/near LRRC4C and LHX5-AS1, both with known roles in neuronal development, as well as several novel population-unique loci. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 409,589 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The past decade has witnessed hundreds of reports declaring or refuting genetic association with putative Alzheimer disease susceptibility genes. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The primary study randomized 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.2 [5.5] years; 145 female participants [53.3%]). 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 272 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ann Neurol 2018;84:737-748. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 443 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We also determined the extent to which sex, educational attainment, and apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (APOE*4) carrier status were associated with decline. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 42,170 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Age, sex, and apolipoprotein E (APOE) are the strongest risk factors for late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 4,592 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This situation presents difficulties for experimental studies, drug development, and other future research. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 94 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Significant proportions of the observed variance in age at symptom onset in ADAD can be explained by family history and mutation type, providing empirical support for use of these data to estimate onset in clinical research. 2 key findings →
Participants: 3,275 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This large GWAS of WMH burden in community-based cohorts of individuals of European descent identifies a novel locus on chromosome 17. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,024 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While genome wide association studies (GWASs) of Alzheimer's Disease (AD) in European (EUR) ancestry cohorts have identified approximately 83 potentially independent AD risk loci, progress in non-European populations has lagged. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 4,385 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients with MCI with APOEε4, abnormal CSF τ level, hippocampal and medial temporal lobe atrophy, entorhinal atrophy, depression, diabetes, hypertension, older age, female gender, lower MMSE score and higher ADAS-cog score, had a high risk for the progression to AD. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 14,821 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A rare variant in TREM2 (p.R47H, rs75932628) was recently reported to increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and, subsequently, other neurodegenerative diseases, i.e. frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), and Parkinson's disease (PD). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 828 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration with neuronal inclusions of the TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (FTLD-TDP) is a fatal neurodegenerative disorder with only a limited number of risk loci identified. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 985 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found that multiple sleep measures predicted future risk of stroke and dementia, but these associations were attenuated after controlling for cardiovascular risk factors and were absent in MR analyses for Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 502,383 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The use of quantitative endophenotypes in genetic studies may provide greater power, allowing for the use of powerful statistical methods and a biological model for the effects of the disease-associated genetic variation. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 313 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Lewy body dementia (LBD) is the second most prevalent dementia, however most genetic risk remains uncharacterized. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
APOE4 confers greater AD risk in women. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 5,496 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Contrary to long-standing views, men and women with the APOE ε3/ε4 genotype have nearly the same odds of developing AD from age 55 to 85 years, but women have an increased risk at younger ages. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified 2 core dimensions of heterogeneity: typicality and severity. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Avagacestat dosed at 25 and 50 mg daily was relatively well tolerated and had low discontinuation rates. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 209 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 27,380 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 →