30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Memantine is a moderate affinity uncompetitive antagonist of glutamate NMDA receptors. 4 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 10,000 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 544 eligible participants (241 women and 303 men), the mean (SD) age was 74.3 (8.2) years, and the mean (SD) sMMSE score was 26.4 (1.9). 1 key finding →
Participants: 554 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia in older people. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 8,257 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonist and antidiabetic drug, has shown neuroprotective effects in animal models. 3 key findings →
Design: phase-2-trial Participants: 204 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise training programme does not slow cognitive impairment in people with mild to moderate dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 494 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Is it possible to prevent atrophy of key brain regions related to cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease (AD)? 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous Cochrane reviews have considered the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in both Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,236 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Since the introduction of the first cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI) in 1997, most clinicians and probably most patients would consider the cholinergic drugs, donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine, to be the first line pharmacotherapy for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, 318 patients with AD completed BPST with an improvement of 5.6 points on the total Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI; mean [SD], 63.3 [16.0] to 57.7 [18.4], t = 4.8, df = 317, p 95% of patients. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 318 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Selection criteria All unconfounded trials specified as randomized in which treatment with piracetam was administered for more than a day and compared with placebo in patients with dementia of Alzheimer type, vascular dementia,or mixed vascular and Alzheimer's disease, or unclassified dementia, or cognitive impairment not fulfilling the criteria for dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Studies conducted more than 20 years ago suggested that physostigmine could improve memory in people with or without dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 29 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study indicates no benefits for memantine in the long-term treatment and prophylaxis of clinically significant neuropsychiatric symptoms. 5 key findings →
Participants: 199 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Isolated rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) is a major prodromal marker of α-synucleinopathies, often preceding the clinical onset of Parkinson's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, or multiple system atrophy. 3 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
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.
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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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