31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
With the sequential parallel comparison design, 152 patients received dextromethorphan-quinidine and 127 received placebo during the study. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 93 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Over a long period of observation, no evidence was found that a specific AHM drug class was more effective than others in lowering risk of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data suggest a revision of the original ADAPT hypothesis that NSAIDs reduce AD risk, as follows: NSAIDs have an adverse effect in later stages of AD pathogenesis, whereas asymptomatic individuals treated with conventional NSAIDs such as naproxen experience reduced AD incidence, but only after 2 to 3 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 54 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sertraline did not demonstrate efficacy for the treatment depression symptoms in patients with AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 67 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Use of naproxen or celecoxib did not improve cognitive function. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black decedents were less likely than White decedents to use hospice for 3 or more days (132 of 378 [34.9%] vs 385 of 834 [46.2%]; P Conclusions and relevance Despite the increase in the use of hospice care in recent decades, racial disparities in the use of hospice remain, especially for noncancer deaths. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,212 Evidence: moderate
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
Estrogen replacement therapy for 1 year did not slow disease progression nor did it improve global, cognitive, or functional outcomes in women with mild to moderate AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The objective of our study was to assess the efficacy and safety of donepezil in young adults with Down syndrome (DS) but no evidence of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 123 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Lipid-lowering medications (LLMs) and especially statin drugs can delay cognitive decline and dementia onset in individuals with and without mild cognitive impairment (MCI) at baseline. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Considering several covariates together allowed the identification of responders. 2 key findings →
Participants: 186 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Treatment with sertraline in patients with dAD is not associated with greater improvement in cognition at week 24 than treatment with placebo. 2 key findings →
Participants: 67 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Treatment with celecoxib or naproxen did not improve depressive symptoms over time compared with placebo. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,528 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Naproxen may attenuate cognitive decline in slow decliners while accelerating decline in fast decliners. 2 key findings →
Participants: 2,388 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite the substantial improvement in apathy scores during the course of the study, there was no clear advantage to the reminiscence-based intervention over the time and attention, one-on-one control intervention. 3 key findings →
Participants: 37 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Based on analysis of prospective and nonprospective studies, NSAID exposure was associated with decreased risk of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Long-term NSAID use may reduce the risk of AD, provided such use occurs well before the onset of dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 104 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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
Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia include agitation, depression, apathy, repetitive questioning, psychosis, aggression, sleep problems, wandering, and a variety of inappropriate behaviors. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Eight out of 15 patients completed the entire study. 4 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The authors believe these design elements are important features to be included in trials of depression and other neuropsychiatric disturbances in Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The design decisions made for ADMET are important elements to be considered in trials assessing the safety and efficacy of medications for clinically significant apathy in Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The CSDD, and particularly its mood subscale, appears to be more sensitive than the HDRS, it's subscales or the NPI-M, for comparing drug to placebo in treating major depression in AD patients. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patient treatment with sertraline was not associated with significantly greater reductions in caregiver distress than placebo treatment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 131 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The critical role of primary care clinicians (PCCs) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) prevention, diagnosis and management must evolve as new treatment paradigms and disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) emerge. 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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