Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia in the elderly. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
39/100
Lemborexant (DAYVIGO™) is an orally administered, dual orexin receptor (OXR) antagonist that exhibits reversible competitive antagonism at OXR1 and OXR2 (> affinity at OXR2) that was discovered and developed by Eisai Inc. for the treatment of adult patients with insomnia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
39/100
It is important to have a wide perspective to provide appropriate medical care for the oldest-old individuals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The foundation of current Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatment involves pharmacological and nonpharmacological management and care planning predicated on patient-centered psychoeducation, shared goal-setting, and decision-making forged by a strong triadic relationship between clinician and the patient-caregiver dyad. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A once-daily, fixed-dose combination of memantine extended-release (ER)/donepezil 28/10 mg (Namzaric™) is available in the USA for patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease (AD) on stable memantine and donepezil therapy. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
The cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine are the current mainstays in the drug treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The evidence base, although incomplete, suggests that modest treatment effect sizes are offset by risk of considerable adverse effects. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil is the most widely used acetylcholinesterase inhibitor licensed for symptomatic treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This standard is based on the results of large-scale, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
36% of practitioners reported not having used therapies for medical conditions other than dementia in patients with AD for reasons of limited compliance in these patients. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease is the most common form of dementia in industrialized countries. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cerebrovascular disease (CVD), as well as secondary ischemic brain injury from cardiovascular disease, are common causes of dementia and cognitive decline in the elderly. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The management of dementia in Alzheimer's disease has dramatically changed since the development of anti-dementia drugs. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
Dimebon (latrepirdine) has received widespread publicity as a potential therapy for Alzheimer's disease following a very positive phase 2 study carried out in Russia and published in the Lancet in 2008. 1 key finding →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
Pimavanserin (ACP-103) is a selective inverse agonist of the 5-hydroxytryptamine 2A (5-HT2A) receptor intended to treat patients with Parkinson's disease psychosis (PDP). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
Nefiracetam (DM-9384) is a cerebral metabolic product under development by Daiichi for the potential treatment of the after-effects of cerebrovascular disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Faced with increasing demands on demonstrating cost effectiveness, pharmaceutical companies are required to conduct pharmacoeconomic evaluations throughout the drug development programme. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Care of dementia is extremely resource demanding and has a great impact on both the formal care systems and the situation for informal carers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
1. Dementia: Significance, Definition, and Epidemiology 2. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This paper considers the suitability of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog) as the gold standard in registration trials of treatments for Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
ChE inhibitors provide symptomatic benefit in AD across key symptom domains. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a complex progressive brain degenerative disorder that has effects on multiple cerebral systems. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Increasing attention is being paid to inappropriate medication use in nursing homes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults with dementia commonly have multiple chronic conditions that prompt clinicians to prescribe medications. 5 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Limited to individuals who had been hospitalized in the 6 months preceding the first assessment, Minimum Data Set diagnoses were compared with those on the hospital discharge claims maintained in the Medicare Provider Analysis and Review database. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
8 of the 272 studies in this tag that have a study page, 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 8. The same 8 appear here every time.
- Safety and efficacy of idalopirdine, a 5-HT6 receptor antagonist, in patients with moderate Alzheimer's disease (LADDER): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial
- A metaanalysis of controlled trials of neuroleptic treatment in dementia
- Potentially inappropriate medications defined by STOPP criteria and the risk of adverse drug events in older hospitalized patients
- Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine for neuroenhancement in healthy individuals: a systematic review
- Safety, efficacy, and tolerability of memantine for cognitive and adaptive outcome measures in adolescents and young adults with Down syndrome: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial
- A phase 2 randomized, placebo-controlled study on the efficacy and safety of AR1001, a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor, in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease
- Simultaneous usage of dementia medications and anticholinergics among Asians and Pacific Islanders
- Alzheimer's disease medication and risk of all-cause mortality and all-cause hospitalization: A retrospective cohort study
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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 Where this research is being discussed: events