The MIND and Mediterranean diets are associated with less postmortem AD pathology, primarily β-amyloid load. 5 key findings →
Participants: 581 Evidence: low
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.
The safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of bapineuzumab (AAB-001), a humanized monoclonal antibody to amyloid beta, were evaluated in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease in a phase 1, randomized, third-party unblinded, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose trial. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results indicate that trans-resveratrol has potential neuroprotective roles in the treatment of moderate to mild AD and that its mechanism may involve a reduction in the accumulation and toxicity of Aβ in the brain of patients, thereby reducing neuroinflammation. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 15 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among caregivers, this small randomized controlled trial found that escitalopram use resulted in improvement in depression, resilience, burden and distress, and quality of life. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The MAXCOG intervention is effective in improving goal performance and satisfaction in clients with MCI and early dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 55 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate the effect of 12 weeks of therapeutic exercise on cognitive function and daily activities in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 57 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mean (SD) β-glucocerebrosidase levels were higher at week 26 (ambroxol, 12.45 [1.97] nmol/h/mg; 91% CI, 11.54-13.36 nmol/h/mg); placebo, 8.50 [1.96] nmol/h/mg; 91% CI, 7.65-9.34 nmol/h/mg; P = .05) in the ambroxol group compared with placebo. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 75 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 results indicate that short term use of this piperine-enhanced curcuminoid preparation is unlikely to result in a clinically significant interaction involving CYP3A, CYP2C9 or the paracetamol conjugation enzymes. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 325 participants enrolled and received study drug. 5 key findings →
Participants: 320 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
58/100
Of the total of 1795 subjects randomized in Clarity AD, 294 subjects were in the Asian region (Japan:152; Korea:129; Singapore:13). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 294 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is marked by progressive cognitive decline linked to oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and synaptic dysfunction. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 29 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Simufilam did not meet co-primary or secondary endpoints in these Phase 3 trials. 3 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this real-life crossover study, THC/CBD oil did not show superiority over placebo in reducing agitation in severe dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 25 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our study compared the pain associated with 5- and 15-s subcutaneous injections of gantenerumab and evaluated the tolerability and pharmacokinetic properties of subcutaneous gantenerumab. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study revealed that 18 weeks of gum chewing with Olibanum did not change the neuropsychological status. 5 key findings →
Participants: 36 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A co-morbidity score was significantly higher in AD participants compared to controls. 3 key findings →
Participants: 187 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Personalized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the precuneus (PC) is emerging as a new non-invasive therapeutic approach in treating Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent studies have also shown that cannabinoids may have more specific effects in interrupting the pathological process in Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Donepezil was relatively well tolerated; adverse events were consistent with current labeling. 2 key findings →
Participants: 974 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study provides data on whether tailored nutritional care is beneficial to home-dwelling AD patients and their spouses. 5 key findings →
Participants: 202 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Defining the primary cognitive endpoint is a major decision for Alzheimer's disease preventive trials. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Twenty-one patients received at least one drug dose (9 GAL/NIM and 12 GAL/PLA). 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
This study will provide clinically relevant data on the likelihood and time to relapse, and predictors of relapse, in patients switched from risperidone to placebo after response to risperidone treatment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study was designed to evaluate whether subjects with amyloid beta (Aβ) pathology, detected using florbetapir positron emission tomorgraphy (PET), demonstrated greater cognitive decline than subjects without Aβ pathology. 4 key findings →
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.
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 →