27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
BackgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is a growing neurodegenerative disorder causing cognitive decline, memory loss, and functional impairment. 1 key finding →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil is an effective and safe drug for the long-term symptomatic treatment of mild to moderately severe AD for up to 144 weeks (2.8 years), and sustained treatment may confer some advantages. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 763 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ARIA-E incidence was 2.0% in non-carriers and 6.2% in εε4/εε4 homozygotes (εε4/εε4-versus-non-carrier OR 3.25, versus 8.49 in Clarity AD and 8.32 in Japan post-marketing surveillance). 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In DIAD, solanezumab was not associated with ARIA. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 52 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In elderly persons, antipsychotic drugs are clinically prescribed off-label for a number of disorders outside of their Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications (schizophrenia and bipolar disorder). 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The long-term efficacy and safety of donepezil (up to 10 mg/day) was evaluated in a multicentre, non-randomised, open-label extension study of 133 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) who had completed a previous 14-week double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 133 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The online SiD decision aid increased preparation for decision making about firearm access in this sample of ADRD caregivers in the United States. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 500 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study found no effect of ongoing BDZR use on ADAS-Cog scores in those with mild to moderate AD over 18 months. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 448 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
As galantamine slowed the decline of functional ability as well as cognition, its effects are likely to be clinically relevant. 1 key finding →
Participants: 653 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is abundant evidence on the health and fitness effects of tai chi. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ARIA-E is rare in cognitively unimpaired Aβ+ and Aβ- populations prior to anti-amyloid drug intervention. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,250 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pharmacologic treatments for Alzheimer's disease include the cholinesterase inhibitors donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donanemab treatment significantly slowed clinical progression at 76w and had a safety profile consistent with earlier studies. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,182 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Benefit continued to accrue with ongoing lecanemab treatment through 36 months. 5 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Consistent with trials evaluating other cholinesterase inhibitors, rivastigmine did not provide consistent efficacy in probable VaD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 710 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Because use of herbal remedies is increasing, a risk-benefit profile of commonly used herbs is needed. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The use of AC medication was associated with increased brain atrophy and dysfunction and clinical decline. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Anticholinergic burden (ACB), the cumulative effect of anticholinergic medications, is associated with adverse outcomes in older people but is less studied in middle-aged populations. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 502,538 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) occurred in 11.2% (10/89) with lecanemab and 13.3% (11/83) with donanemab-less than in pivotal trials. 5 key findings →
Participants: 89 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We used Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to examine the distribution of incident ARIA-E from the start of bapineuzumab treatment and proportional hazards regression models to assess risk factors associated with ARIA. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 262 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Crenezumab doses of ≤120 mg/kg intravenously q4w were well tolerated. 1 key finding →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 21 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Asymptomatic ARIA-E was detected in solanezumab-treated and placebo-treated AD patients. 1 key finding →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 2,042 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Bapineuzumab SC once-monthly did not demonstrate significant treatment difference over placebo on cerebral amyloid signal at one year but was well-tolerated. 3 key findings →
Participants: 146 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Exposure to medications with severe AC cognitive burden may be a risk factor for developing MCI. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,690 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this national case-control study of nursing home residents with ADRD receiving hospice care, initiation of benzodiazepine or antipsychotic use was associated with increased 180-day mortality. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control Participants: 139,103 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
10 of the 468 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 →