27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
MarkVCID2 enrolled 1883 individuals age 73.4 ± 7.5 years, 65.0% female, 24.2% Hispanic, and 27.1% non-Hispanic Black. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,883 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CVR was significantly associated with cognitive performance independently of AD pathology. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 28 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Elevations in plasma Abeta(42) peptide levels are associated with earlier onset of AD and increased risk of death. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 204 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence links air pollution to dementia, yet its role in Lewy body dementia (LBD) remains unclear. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Establishing this clinical definition supports future research and investigation of an underlying mechanism. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 35 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among adults with DS, decreasing levels of plasma Aβ42, a decline in the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio, or increasing levels of Aβ40 may be sensitive indicators of conversion to AD, possibly reflecting compartmentalization of Aβ peptides in the brain. 3 key findings →
Participants: 225 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fornix FA both cross-sectionally correlated with and longitudinally predicted memory decline and progression to AD. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Quantitative Susceptibility Mapping (QSM) MRI at 7 Tesla and 11-Carbon Pittsburgh-Compound-B PET were used for investigating the relationship between brain iron and Amyloid beta (Aβ) plaque-load in a context of increased risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD), as reflected by the Apolipoprotein E ε4 (APOE-e4) allele and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in elderly subjects. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Triplication of chromosome 21 in Down syndrome (DS) results in overexpression of the minibrain kinase/dual-specificity tyrosine phosphorylated and regulated kinase 1A gene (DYRK1A). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that quantification of WM changes in DS could provide a promising and clinically relevant biomarker for AD clinical onset and progression. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Synaptic neurodegeneration is thought to be an early event initiated by soluble β-amyloid (Aβ) aggregates that closely correlates with cognitive decline in Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The modified questionnaire and interview instruments capture a range of impairment in DS adults, including subthreshold symptomatology, and the instruments provide complementary information relevant to the ascertainment of dementia in DS. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 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.
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 →