PET can evaluate amyloid expansion from cortex to subcortex. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,433 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Mutations in triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) have been linked to increased Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) is a microglial innate immune receptor associated with a lethal form of early, progressive dementia, Nasu-Hakola disease, and with an increased risk of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Reliable biomarkers of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are currently lacking. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Identification of individuals at high risk of dementia is essential for development of prevention strategies, but reliable tools are lacking for risk stratification in the population. 4 key findings →
Participants: 181 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent evidence suggests that Web-based interventions have the potential to support caregivers by decreasing caregiver stress and burden. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Defining the primary cognitive endpoint is a major decision for Alzheimer's disease preventive trials. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia worldwide, with the prevalence continuing to grow in part because of the aging world population. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a continuous endothelial membrane within brain microvessels that has sealed cell-to-cell contacts and is sheathed by mural vascular cells and perivascular astrocyte end-feet. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CSF tau and 18 F-AV-1451 have equal performance in early clinical stages of AD, but 18 F-AV-1451 is superior in the dementia stage, and exhibits close to perfect diagnostic performance for mild to moderate AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 14 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings suggest that patterns of cortical Aβ and tau do not differ in people with PD-CN, people with PD-MCI, and healthy older adults. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 30 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration causes a spectrum of complex degenerative disorders including frontotemporal dementia, progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal syndrome, each of which is associated with changes in the principal neurotransmitter systems. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Age-related increases in dementia risk can be attributed to accumulation of multiple pathologies, each of which contributes to dementia risk. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older patients on hemodialysis are at substantial risk of diagnosis with dementia and Alzheimer's disease, and carrying these diagnoses is associated with a twofold higher mortality. 4 key findings →
Participants: 356,668 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
This analysis combining data from two health systems shows that area deprivation is an independent risk factor for cognitive dysfunction in older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,186 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on the systematic review, evidence suggests that treating hearing loss in persons with cognitive impairment can have benefits to communication and quality of life. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
The results show that routinely collected primary care data may be used to identify undiagnosed dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 483 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The concept of diabetic retinopathy as a microvascular disease has evolved, in that it is now considered a more complex diabetic complication in which neurodegeneration plays a significant role. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disease that causes late-onset dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A lack of understanding of the causes of attrition in longitudinal studies of older adults may lead to higher attrition rates and bias longitudinal study results. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 30,433 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis-frontotemporal dementia (ALS-FTD) constitutes a devastating disease spectrum characterized by 43-kDa TAR DNA-binding protein (TDP-43) pathology. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results provide evidence that, in the absence of significant neurodegenerative processes, individuals who harbor AD neuropathology may remain cognitively unimpaired. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 79 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The precise mechanism through which many of these genes are associated with AD remains unknown. 3 key findings →
Participants: 977 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Additional study of mechanisms of action and methods for titrating stimulation parameters will be needed to determine if DBS has potential as an AD treatment. 2 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Use of potentially inappropriate medications in Australian nursing home residents with advanced dementia is common. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 65 Evidence: high
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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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 (3.6% 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 →