However, the effect sizes were small. 1 key finding →
Participants: 34 Evidence: high
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.
Microglia activation is observed in various neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is one of the most common neurological syndromes in the world. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,315 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Two randomized controlled trials were included, one was scale A, and the other was scale B. The rates of abnormal liver function, withdrawal from treatment, and withdrawal due to adverse effects were higher in the treatment group (OR = 7.86, 95%CI: 2.50-24.69; OR = 4.70, 95%CI: 2.61-8.44; and OR = 5.47, 95%CI: 3.01-9.94; respectively) compared with the placebo group. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 710 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuroinflammation is an important host defense response to secondary brain injury after intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). 4 key findings →
Participants: 216 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Just as neuronal activity is essential to normal brain function, microtubule-associated protein tau appears to be critical to normal neuronal activity in the mammalian brain, especially in the evolutionary most advanced species, the homo sapiens. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
48/100
Sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy (SICM) is common in septic patients with a high mortality and is characterized by an abnormal immune response. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Here, we observed significant compromise in macroautophagy/autophagy in the brains of mlkl knockout (KO) mice, as evidenced by the downregulation of BECN1/Beclin1 and ULK1 (unc-51 like autophagy activating kinase 1). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) is involved in nonmalignant pathological processes. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Growing evidence suggests that type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with age-dependent Alzheimer's disease (AD), the latter of which has even been considered as type 3 diabetes. 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 →