Alzheimer disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia worldwide. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 24 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) have overlapping symptoms, and accurate differential diagnosis is important for targeted intervention and treatment. 4 key findings →
Participants: 4,099 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 503 participants (mean [SD] age, 64.6 [2.8] years; 321 [63.8%] women; 305 [60.6%] Hispanic, 120 [23.9%] non-Hispanic Black, and 78 [15.5%] non-Hispanic White) with Aβ PET, MRI (n = 501), and tau PET (n = 355) data were studied. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 501 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ATTRACTnet was developed in an internal test set of 799 patients (mean [SD] age, 75.1 [11.1] years; 516 [64.7%] male and 283 [35.3%] female) using 5-fold cross-validation with an additional external test set of 422 patients. 5 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 799 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A single-timepoint ResNet3D model achieved modest performance (c-index ~ 0.70). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable convened a working group to review data on amyloid imaging related abnormalities (ARIA) in response to concerns raised by the Food and Drug Administration. 3 key findings →
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A novel approach to correcting for intensity nonuniformity in magnetic resonance (MR) data is described that achieves high performance without requiring a model of the tissue classes present.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In cohort 1, PVEC increased the effect on AD-versus-HC discrimination from a Cohen d value of 1.68 to 2.0 for composite SUVRs and from 0.04 to 1.04 for mesial temporal cortex SUVRs. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ten papers were identified from 7 studies. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We conclude that FHm individuals without dementia have progressive gray matter volume reductions in select AD-vulnerable brain regions, specifically the precuneus and parahippocampal gyrus. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
This study suggests that larger head circumference is associated with less cognitive impairment in the face of cerebral atrophy. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 270 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
When compared with the other groups, AD patients demonstrated significantly higher SUVRs (P Conclusion (18)F-florbetaben had high sensitivity for AD, clearly distinguished patients with FTLD from AD, and provided results comparable to those reported with (11)C-Pittsburgh Compound B in a variety of neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Microglial activation distributes preferentially along highly connected brain regions, similar to tau pathology. 5 key findings →
Participants: 32 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid-β (Aβ) pathology is one of the earliest detectable brain changes in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the machine learning verification, the identification accuracy of SCD, aMCI, d-AD from NC was higher when fused ALFF and fALFF features (76.44, 81.94, and 91.83%, respectively) than only using ALFF or fALFF features. 5 key findings →
Participants: 44 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that dCDT is a suitable screening tool to identify early cognitive dysfunction. 1 key finding →
Participants: 381 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results demonstrate that unsupervised digital memory assessments might be used for diagnosis and prognosis in Alzheimer's disease, potentially in combination with plasma biomarkers. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Electrophysiology Professional Interest Area (EPIA) and Global Brain Consortium endorsed recommendations on candidate electroencephalography (EEG) measures for Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Biomarkers useful for the predementia stages of Alzheimer's disease are needed. 2 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The trend changes in the hippocampus subfields and further illustrates that SCD is the preclinical stage of AD earlier than aMCI. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results support the feasibility of bridging of clinical trials in the prodromal stage of AD between Asia and western countries. 3 key findings →
Participants: 75 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We used a new method we developed for automated hippocampal segmentation, called the auto context model, to analyze brain MRI scans of 400 subjects from the Alzheimer's disease neuroimaging initiative. 4 key findings →
Participants: 400 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
Early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease plays a pivotal role in patient care and clinical trials. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), launched in 2004, has worked to accelerate drug development by validating imaging and blood/cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease clinical treatment trials. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Baseline 18F-MK-6240 PET showed a minimal signal in CU participants, localized signal to the medial temporal lobe in participants with MCI, and a signal spanning the inferolateral temporal lobe and extending posteriorly along the ventral cortex in participants with AD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 27 Evidence: moderate
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.
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
- Randomised / 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
- Multi-centre 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →