Previous data have linked omega-3 fatty acids with risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 103,651 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
72/100
The best CSF measures for identifying MCI-AD were Aβ42/total tau (t-tau) and Aβ42/hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) (area under the curve [AUC] 0.93-0.94). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 122 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Glymphatic failure may precede amyloid pathology, and predicts amyloid deposition, neurodegeneration, and clinical progression in AD. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 419 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The highly consistent regional hierarchy of PET-evidenced amyloid deposition across participants resembles neuropathologic observations and suggests a predictable regional sequence that may be used to stage an individual's progress of amyloid pathology in vivo. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 667 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Brain iron elevation is implicated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis, but the impact of iron on disease outcomes has not been previously explored in a longitudinal study. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APOE ε4 carriage and older age were predictors of longitudinal Aβ accumulation within the Aβ- group but not the Aβ+ group. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 325 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We set out to determine factors that influence the rate of brain atrophy in 1-year longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 363 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hearing impairment was recently identified as the most prominent risk factor for dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 165,550 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early identification of individuals at risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia is important for developing disease-modifying therapies. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,677 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Genetic risk factors of AD dementia demonstrate effects related to Aβ, as well as synergistic interactions with Aβ. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 702 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Debate surrounds the role of chronic pain as a risk factor for cognitive decline and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 995 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The most novel characteristics of our machine learning model compared to previous ones are the following: 1) our deep learning model is multi-tasking, in the sense that it jointly learns to simultaneously predict both MCI to AD conversion as well as AD vs. healthy controls classification, which facilitates relevant feature extraction for AD prognostication; 2) the neural network classifier employs fewer parameters than other deep learning architectures which significantly limits data-overfitting (we use ∼550,000 network parameters, which is orders of magnitude lower than other network designs); 3) both structural MRI images and their warp field characteristics, which quantify local volumetric changes in relation to the MRI template, were used as separate input streams to extract as much information as possible from the MRI data. 1 key finding →
Participants: 785 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The 59 recruiting sites for the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 177 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Women show better verbal memory than men in aMCI despite similar levels of brain hypometabolism. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 672 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This advantage may represent a sex-specific form of cognitive reserve delaying verbal memory decline until more advanced disease stages. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 379 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The influence of this genetic risk may begin in early life and make an individual more susceptible to cognitive impairment in late life. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Increased WMHs are associated with aging, decreased glucose metabolism, and decline in executive function but do not affect AD-specific pathologic progression, suggesting that the vascular contribution to dementia is probably additive although not necessarily independent of the amyloid pathway. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Women with MCI have greater longitudinal rates of cognitive and functional progression than men. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
The neuropathologic changes underlying Alzheimer disease (AD) start before overt cognitive symptoms arise, but it is not well-known how they relate to the first subtle cognitive changes. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 217 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 730 Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) participants without dementia (282 cognitively normal, 448 mild cognitive impairment) with baseline [ 18 F]florbetapir PET and CSF Aβ 42 available. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 318 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data-driven WMH spatial patterns reflect discrete underlying etiologies including arteriolosclerosis, CAA, AD, and normal aging. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This relationship was evident even after accounting for degree of memory deficit across the continuum of cognitive impairment and dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 793 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
58/100
Accurate prediction of clinical changes of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients, including both qualitative change (i.e., conversion to Alzheimer's disease (AD)) and quantitative change (i.e., cognitive scores) at future time points, is important for early diagnosis of AD and for monitoring the disease progression. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Lowering brain Aβ must be accomplished early in the evolution of AD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 475 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common form of dementia, shares many aspects of abnormal brain aging. 2 key findings →
Participants: 195 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 27,380 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.
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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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 →