27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE ε4 carriers. 1 key finding →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,090 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Resveratrol was safe and well-tolerated. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 119 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Enrollment was undertaken between May 18, 2021, and September 8, 2023. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 210 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Epidemiological studies suggest that consumption of DHA is associated with a reduced incidence of Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Participants: 102 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00056225. 1 key finding →
Participants: 340 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No clinically important adverse events were associated with treatment. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 432 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results show that in addition to APOE ε4 allele count, severity of Aβ neuropathology and comorbid cerebrovascular pathology may be relevant for clinicians prescribing anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies for early AD and developing individualized safety monitoring plans. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 985 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Simvastatin had no benefit on the progression of symptoms in individuals with mild to moderate AD despite significant lowering of cholesterol. 4 key findings →
Participants: 406 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 236 eligible participants screened, 43 were excluded. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 142 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The primary planned analyses did not show a significant treatment effect, but were confounded by unexplained variance. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,052 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were no baseline differences between active treatment and placebo groups in age, education, brain volumes, clinical rating scores, or APOE ε4 carrier status. 3 key findings →
Participants: 313 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between May 18, 2021, and Sept 8, 2023, 9981 participants were screened, of whom 3808 were randomly assigned; 1855 in evoke (semaglutide, n=928; placebo, n=927) and 1953 in evoke+ (semaglutide, n=976; placebo, n=977). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 928 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study showed that flutemetamol injection labeled with radioactive fluorine 18 was safe and had high sensitivity and specificity in an end-of-life population. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 176 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Group differences were seen in skin and subcutaneous tissue concerns (P=.05), including 3 possible drug rashes and 3 reports of hair color change in the treatment groups. 2 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PF-04494700 at 20 mg/d was associated with increased adverse events and cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Participants: 399 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The primary efficacy analysis did not show cognitive benefit with huperzine A 200 μg BID. 3 key findings →
Participants: 70 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ladostigil was safe and well tolerated but did not delay progression to dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 107 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries suggests that use of antihypertensive medications that stimulate type 2 and 4 angiotensin II receptors was associated with lower risk of ADRD compared with antihypertensive medications that inhibit these receptors. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 57 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vitamin E had no benefit in patients with mild cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 769 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study demonstrated statistically significant differences between physostigmine and placebo on both a performance-based cognitive functioning instrument and a clinician's global evaluation. 5 key findings →
Participants: 366 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The efficacy, safety and disease-modification of tramiprosate (homotaurine)were investigated in a recently completed large-scale Phase III clinical study in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD), the Alphase study. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 109 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Estrogen replacement therapy for 1 year did not slow disease progression nor did it improve global, cognitive, or functional outcomes in women with mild to moderate AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ten weeks of treatment with PF-04494700 was safe and well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease, indicating the feasibility of a larger long-term efficacy trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 28 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study failed to find a beneficial effect of exogenous melatonin, consistent with a number of other studies. 2 key findings →
Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
OSA may aggravate cognitive dysfunction in dementia and thus may be a reversible cause of cognitive loss in patients with AD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
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. 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →