alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Research

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 126–150 of 804 studies (page 6 of 33) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Showing 804 studies tagged randomized — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Cholinesterase inhibitors for mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2012-09-12

Main results Nine studies (from eight published reports) of 5149 individuals with mild cognitive impairment (however defined) were included in the review. 5 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Participants: 5,149 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Cholinesterase inhibitors for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2006-01-25

Since the introduction of the first cholinesterase inhibitor (ChEI) in 1997, most clinicians and probably most patients would consider the cholinergic drugs, donepezil, galantamine and rivastigmine, to be the first line pharmacotherapy for mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide 14 mg (flexible dose) in early-stage symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (evoke and evoke+): two phase 3, randomised, placebo-controlled trials

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. The Lancet 2026-03-19

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

One-year repeated cycles of cognitive training (CT) for Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. Aging clinical and experimental research 2013-06-20

Present results suggest that repeated cycles of CT in patients with AD treated with ChEIs are associated with benefits in several areas of cognitive function. 3 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 16 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the effects of donepezil on neuronal markers and hippocampal volumes in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. The American journal of psychiatry 2003-11-01

These preliminary results suggest that donepezil may have a potentially protective effect in Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →

Participants: 67 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

The effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of aggression and psychosis in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2006-01-25

Analysis included patients treated with an atypical antipsychotic, compared with placebo Main results Sixteen placebo controlled trials have been completed with atypical antipsychotics although only nine had sufficient data to contribute to a meta-analysis and only five have been published in full in peer reviewed journals. 5 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Lecanemab Treatment in a Specialty Memory Clinic

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. JAMA Neurology 2025-07-01

The most significant adverse events associated with these therapies are infusion-related reactions and amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) with edema/effusion (ARIA-E) and/or hemorrhage/hemosiderin deposition (ARIA-H). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort Participants: 234 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Naproxen and celecoxib do not prevent AD in early results from a randomized controlled trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Neurology 2007-04-25

These results do not support the hypothesis that celecoxib or naproxen prevent Alzheimer dementia, at least within the early years after initiation of treatment. 2 key findings →

Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

A randomized placebo-controlled pilot trial of omega-3 fatty acids and alpha lipoic acid in Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2014-01-01

Oxidative stress, inflammation, and increased cholesterol levels are all mechanisms that have been associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. 5 key findings →

Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Effects of a gamma-secretase inhibitor in a randomized study of patients with Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Neurology 2006-02-01

LY450139 dihydrate, a gamma-secretase inhibitor, was studied in a randomized, controlled trial of 70 patients with Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →

Participants: 70 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Sertraline for the treatment of depression in Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry 2010-02-01

Sertraline did not demonstrate efficacy for the treatment depression symptoms in patients with AD. 2 key findings →

Participants: 67 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Chronic divalproex sodium to attenuate agitation and clinical progression of Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Archives of general psychiatry 2011-08-01

There was no difference between groups in time to emergence of agitation or psychosis (Cox proportional hazard ratio, 0.96; P = .88). 3 key findings →

Participants: 122 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Effectiveness of Personalized Hippocampal Network-Targeted Stimulation in Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. JAMA network open 2024-05-01

This randomized clinical trial demonstrated the positive effects of rTMS on cognitive and functional performance, and the plastic changes in the hippocampal-cortical network. 5 key findings →

Participants: 30 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Bupropion for the Treatment of Apathy in Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. JAMA network open 2020-05-01

After controlling for the baseline AES-C score, site, and comedication with donepezil or galantamine, the mean change in the AES-C score between the bupropion and placebo groups was not statistically significant (mean change, 2.22; 95% CI, -0.47 to 4.91; P = .11). 4 key findings →

Participants: 108 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Phase 3 trial of flutemetamol labeled with radioactive fluorine 18 imaging and neuritic plaque density

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. JAMA neurology 2015-03-01

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

18F-flutemetamol amyloid imaging in Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment: a phase 2 trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Annals of neurology 2010-09-01

(18)F-Flutemetamol performs similarly to the (11)C-PIB parent molecule within the same subjects and provides high test-retest replicability and potentially much wider accessibility for clinical and research use. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Memantine for patients with Parkinson's disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. The Lancet. Neurology 2010-08-20

No significant differences were noted between the two treatments in patients with PDD (3·6 with memantine vs 3·8 with placebo, -0·1 [-0·6 to 0·3]; p=0·576) or in the total population (3·5 with memantine vs 3·8 with placebo, -0·3 [-0·7 to 0·1]; p=0·120). 4 key findings →

Participants: 199 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Long-term effects of Abeta42 immunisation in Alzheimer's disease: follow-up of a randomised, placebo-controlled phase I trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Lancet (London, England) 2008-07-01

20 participants--15 in the AN1792 group, five in the placebo group--died before follow-up started. 2 key findings →

Participants: 80 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions to enhance sleep in mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Journal of sleep research 2020-12-02

Suboptimal sleep causes cognitive decline and probably accelerates Alzheimer's Disease (AD) progression. 4 key findings →

Design: systematic review Participants: 1,056 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ Change the filters

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. Show only studies that are free to read

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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed