Down syndrome (DS) is the most common chromosomal aberration and genetically determined cause of intellectual disability. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
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.
Down syndrome (DS), characterised by compromised brain development and intellectual challenges, often manifests Alzheimer's disease (AD) -like symptoms. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Some studies have shown that CSF amyloid-beta 1-42 (Aβ₁₋₄₂), total tau (T-tau) and tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau(181p)) proteins are useful diagnostic markers for distinguishing between clinically stable mild cognitive impairment (MCI) patients and those who will develop Alzheimeŕs disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 36 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
30/100
The early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (ADD) has gained new significance through the further discovery of blood biomarkers. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Identifying patients at risk for developing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD) remains challenging in clinical practice, even as scientific understanding of dementia advances generally. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We don’t understand Alzheimer, its origin and disease mechanisms. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Richmond Health and Wellness Program (RHWP) provides interprofessional care coordination and wellness services within Richmond’s low income senior housing communities for approximately 1,000 subsidized housing units. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The behavioural and mental health needs of people with PWS result from the interactions between biological vulnerabilities associated with having PWS and living in a changing and demanding environment. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Most remarkably, research by Cryan and others has shown that transplanting microbes from the guts of people with psychiatric disorders like depression to the guts of rodents can cause comparable symptoms in the animals.CREDIT: JAMES PROVOST (CC BY-ND)Neuroscientist John CryanUniversity College CorkThese effects may occur in several ways — through the vagus nerve connecting the gut to the brain, through the influence of gut bacteria on our immune systems, or by microbes synthesizing molecules that our nerve cells use to communicate. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among Medicare beneficiaries from 2008 to 2018, AD incidence generally decreased while MCI increased. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
30/100
Our study underscores the role of telehealth in increasing AWV uptake and facilitating cognitive assessments. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patient access to innovative care for complex conditions like schizophrenia remains limited by systemic, clinical and policy-level barriers. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Healthy Brain Initiative: The Public Health Road Map for State and National Partnerships was recently updated for years 2018-2022, which includes recommendations for implementing emergency preparedness (EP) measures at the state and local levels with attention to the unique needs of people living with Alzheimer's disease and other related dementias (ADRD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia risk is influenced by biological and lifestyle factors as well as broader socioeconomic conditions; however, the extent to which socioeconomic deprivation creates structural exposures that affect cognitive aging remains unclear. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 6,911,104 patients (min=Idaho: 45,160; max=California: 2.46 million), we observed a substantial difference in overall diagnosed prevalence across states of residence: Oregon and Montana had the highest diagnosed prevalence (6.6% and 6.5%, respectively); New Mexico had the lowest (2.3%). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black Ohioans are concerned about the rising prevalence of Alzheimer’s Disease, however social barriers that prevent equitable access to care, support and treatment is of overwhelming concern. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Geographical differences in Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) prevalence may be driven by under-diagnosis due to insufficient healthcare access. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADRD mortality rates were slightly higher in rural areas compared to urban areas, with no significant differences between rural-adjacent and rural-nonadjacent counties in recent years. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our study unveils the complex interplay between area deprivation and language decline in AD patients. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From 2016 to 2022, Alzheimer’s disease mortality significantly increased among Black individuals (AAPC = 8.3%, 95% CI [2.6 to 16.0]; p < 0.05) and declined among White individuals (AAPC = −2.9%, 95% CI [−12.3 to 7.6] p < 0.05). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
30/100
These findings highlight a persistent spatial mismatch between population needs and care infrastructure. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Anemia and iron deficiency are common in older adults, yet their relevance to blood biomarkers for Alzheimer disease (AD) remains underappreciated. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
12.05.2026: Debatt - En enkel blodprøve kan nå påvise fosforylert tau-protein 217 (p-tau217) – et biologisk tegn på Alzheimers sykdom, som kan være til stede mange år før de første symptomene viser seg. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We evaluated known AD-associated loci (Bellenguez et al. 2022) and 27 loci reached nominal significance (p < 0.05) in at least one cognitive domain. 5 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 27,380 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 →