Reduction of amyloid via amyloid-targeting therapies may result in clinical benefit. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,582 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
MCI prevalence was 6.7% for ages 60-64, 8.4% for 65-69, 10.1% for 70-74, 14.8% for 75-79, and 25.2% for 80-84. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A rapidly growing literature strongly suggests that exercise, specifically aerobic exercise, may attenuate cognitive impairment and reduce dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) is the most effective treatment for vasomotor symptoms and other symptoms of the climacteric. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Vitamin E had no benefit in patients with mild cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 769 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Association of HT use and risk of AD may depend on timing of use. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for age at baseline, gender, apolipoprotein genotype, and NYU paragraph delayed recall score, showed that higher BDI scores were associated with progression to AD (p = 0.03). 4 key findings →
Participants: 208 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Understanding the neuropathological effects of amyloid β (Aβ)-targeting therapies and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) in Alzheimer's disease is critical for optimising treatment efficacy and patient outcomes. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the potential development of new disease-modifying Alzheimer's disease (AD) therapies, simple, widely available screening tests are needed to identify which individuals, who are experiencing symptoms of cognitive or behavioral decline, should be further evaluated for initiation of treatment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
The vitamin E and donepezil trial for the treatment of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) was conducted at 69 centers in North America; 24 centers participated in an MRI sub study. 2 key findings →
Participants: 131 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A systematic literature review and meta-analyses (where appropriate) were performed and the GRADE approach was used to update the previous American Academy of Sleep Medicine Practice Parameters on the treatment of intrinsic circadian rhythm sleep-wake disorders. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease with a complex and heterogeneous pathophysiology. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neither targeted lecanemab treatment nor treatment unrestricted by APOE ε4 genotype is cost-effective vs SoC alone for patients with MCI or mild dementia due to AD. 2 key findings →
Design: modelling Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Treatment options for Alzheimer disease (AD) are limited and have focused mainly on symptomatic therapy and improving quality of life. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In DIAD, clinical disease stage and BDNF Met66 were associated with cognitive impairment and levels of site-specific tau phosphorylation. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 527 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Four subphenotypes were computationally derived that correlated with cardiovascular diseases and mental health illnesses. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 273 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Donanemab (Kisunla®), an IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting N-terminal pyroglutamate-modified forms of amyloid-β, is approved in the United States for treatment of early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
58/100
Of 413 477 All of Us participants, 2038 were eligible. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 26 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Disease staging, whereby the spatial extent and load of brain pathology are used to estimate the severity of Alzheimer disease (AD), is pivotal to the gold-standard neuropathological diagnosis of AD. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Apolipoprotein E (Apo-E) is a major cholesterol carrier that supports lipid transport and injury repair in the brain. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Validation of the safety and efficacy of ECT in patients with advanced AD with refractory agitation and aggression is necessary. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Structural imaging based on magnetic resonance is an integral part of the clinical assessment of patients with suspected Alzheimer dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Rivastigmine therapy for PDD is associated with significant tradeoffs in efficacy and adverse effects. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 541 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients with isolated rapid-eye-movement sleep behaviour disorder (RBD) are commonly regarded as being in the early stages of a progressive neurodegenerative disease involving α-synuclein pathology, such as Parkinson's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, or multiple system atrophy. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Where “Free full text” comes from
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
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
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.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomized / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multicenter collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
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 32,180 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.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 32,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66.5% of the library) and OpenAlex (15.8%), 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.
1,045 records (3.2% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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
Last updated