As a result, physicians struggle to interpret these models, and feel it is hard to trust them. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,048 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
As a result, physicians struggle to interpret these models, and feel it is hard to trust them. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,048 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We evaluated the performance of CSF biomarkers for predicting risk of clinical decline and conversion to dementia in non-demented patients with cognitive symptoms. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 619 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Olink Proteomics panel of inflammation markers ( https://www.olink.com/products/inflammation/ ) will be used to evaluate 92 proteins associated with inflammatory diseases and related biological processes. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 50 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data collected from clinical trials and cohort studies, such as dementia studies, are often high-dimensional, censored, heterogeneous and contain missing information, presenting challenges to traditional statistical analysis. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,037 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative condition marked by a decline in cognitive functions with no validated disease modifying treatment. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Implementation of amyloid biomarkers in clinical practice would be accelerated if such biomarkers could be measured in blood. 4 key findings →
Participants: 719 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous studies have evaluated gene expression in Alzheimer's disease (AD) brains to identify mechanistic processes, but have been limited by the size of the datasets studied. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The heterogeneity of Alzheimer's disease contributes to the high failure rate of prior clinical trials. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 562 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder with no cure, making preventive strategies crucial. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,500 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
To develop a new method for measuring Alzheimer's disease (AD)-specific similarity of cortical atrophy patterns at the individual-level, we employed an individual-level machine learning algorithm. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 473 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Age-related cognitive impairment and dementia are an increasing societal burden. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers are useful in the diagnosis and the prediction of progression of several neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
Participants: 535 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
To test whether cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) growth-associated protein 43 (GAP-43) concentration is elevated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia and its associations with other hallmarks of AD, we examined the CSF GAP-43 measurements of 787 participants (245 cognitively normal (CN), 415 individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 127 individuals with AD dementia) from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) study. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 787 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Long-term use of urate-lowering therapies (ULT) may reduce inflammaging and thus prevent cognitive decline during aging. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 51 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Care quality has important implications for people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 373,695 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Most approaches to machine learning from electronic health data can only predict a single endpoint. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,909 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's Disease is a complex, multifactorial, and comorbid condition. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) presents a significant challenge due to the subtle biomarker changes often overlooked. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A possible involvement of the gene IL1RAP (interleukin-1 receptor-associated protein) in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been suggested in GWASs of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tau levels and longitudinal change in brain amyloid burden. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,446 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Up-to-date, strictly cross-nationally comparable and nationally representative data on cognitive health are essential for our understanding of the dementia-related challenges in healthcare, to detect shortcomings in healthcare systems and to design effective prevention strategies. 1 key finding →
Participants: 47,773 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At least 45% of dementia and 60% of stroke cases are due to modifiable risk factors and could in part be prevented through healthy behavior. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,478 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases the risk of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that dCDT is a suitable screening tool to identify early cognitive dysfunction. 1 key finding →
Participants: 381 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
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 →