28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Plasma A+/T + individuals showed the highest levels of astrocyte reactivity, Aβ plaque, tau tangle, and axonal degeneration, and the lowest hippocampal volume and temporal-metaROI cortical thickness. 5 key findings →
Participants: 470 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Phosphorylated tau 181 (p-tau181), phosphorylated tau 231 (p-tau231), neurofilament light (NfL), and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) concentrations were unchanged both when stored at +4°C and +18°C. Amyloid-β 40 (Aβ40) and amyloid-β 42 (Aβ42) concentrations were stable for 24 h at +4°C but declined when stored at +18°C for longer than 6 h. This decline did not affect the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio. 5 key findings →
Participants: 13 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Heritability estimates were 16% for Aβ42/40, 42% for NfL, and 60% for GFAP. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Specific plasma biomarker combinations predicted amyloid burden in the precuneus, tau in the entorhinal cortex, hippocampal atrophy, and memory decline. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Brain amyloidosis differentiated several measures, especially EDTA plasma pTa u 181 A β 42 ( d = 1.29). 4 key findings →
Participants: 38 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma AB42/40 had the highest AUC (0.833, 95% C.I. 0.767-0.899) at a cut-point of 0.0706 for discriminating between the two cerebral amyloid groups (sensitivity 76%, specificity 78.5%). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
While the biomarkers available for Alzheimer's disease are continually expanding, including clinically approved blood tests, not all of the relationships between various biomarkers have been fully elucidated. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia blood biomarkers are becoming increasingly important. 3 key findings →
Participants: 111 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To examine whether the type of blood collection tubes affects the quantification of plasma biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease analyzed with a single-molecule array (Simoa), we recruited a healthy cohort (n = 34, 11 males, mean age = 28.7 ± 7.55) and collected plasma in the following tubes: dipotassium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (K2-EDTA), heparin lithium (Li-Hep), and heparin sodium (Na-Hep). 1 key finding →
Participants: 34 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma biomarkers have shown promising performance in research cohorts in discriminating between different stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Participants: 75 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) signature of Alzheimer's disease (AD) includes abnormal levels of amyloid-β 1-42 (Aβ42), total tau (t-Tau) and phosphorylated tau (p-Tau). 1 key finding →
Participants: 168 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma β-synuclein levels were higher in preclinical AD and even higher in MCI and AD dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 48 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age acceleration was significantly associated with sex, clinical diagnosis, and levels of eight plasma biomarkers, including P-tau217 levels. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease associated with dementia and is a serious concern for the health of individuals and government health care systems worldwide. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We assessed cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of tau and other biomarkers of neurodegenerative disease. 4 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In regression analyses across the whole study sample adjusted for age, sex, and diagnostic group, there was no relationship between HbA1c or fasting glucose and CSF tau, p-tau 182, or Abeta42 levels. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 91 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 96 proteins were decreased in MCI-SNAP compared to CN and MCI-AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 96 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) are hypothesised to have an important yet unknown role in the dementia disease pathology. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,039 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Accurate staging of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology is crucial for therapeutic trials and prognosis, but existing fluid biomarkers lack specificity, especially for assessing tau deposition severity, in amyloid-beta (Aβ)-positive patients. 2 key findings →
Participants: 136 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on retrospective data, we develop personalized risk estimates for MCI patients. 4 key findings →
Participants: 200 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
P‐tau181 in CSF and plasma predicted tau accumulation (r > 0.36, P < .001), even in AD‐continuum individuals with normal baseline tau‐PET (A+T–; r > 0.37, P < .05). 4 key findings →
Participants: 163 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a potential diagnostic and prognostic plasma biomarker for numerous neurological diseases including Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Participants: 350 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with all biomarkers positive for AD (N = 145) had the highest hazard for progression to dementia due to AD, whilst patients with no positive biomarkers (N = 111) had the lowest. 3 key findings →
Participants: 145 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients were diagnosed with AD (n = 148, 73.2%), mixed dementia (n = 38, 18.8%), CJD, vascular dementia (n = 4, 2.0% for each), Lewy body dementia, and frontotemporal dementia (n = 3, 1.5% for each). 5 key findings →
Participants: 202 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In non-demented individuals along the AD continuum, p-tau drives cognitive dysfunction. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
10 of the 707 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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. Show only studies that are free to read
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →