The majority of community-dwelling older persons have brain pathology. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 80 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The pathophysiological process of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is thought to begin many years before the diagnosis of AD dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results suggest that frequent participation in cognitively stimulating activities is associated with reduced risk of AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 111 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Loneliness is associated with an increased risk of late-life dementia but not with its leading causes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 76 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We envision that defining AD as a biological construct will enable a more accurate characterization and understanding of the sequence of events that lead to cognitive impairment that is associated with AD, as well as the multifactorial etiology of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia due to Alzheimer disease is preceded by about 5 to 6 years of accelerated decline in multiple cognitive functions. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,071 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We tested the hypotheses that TDP-43 with Alzheimer's disease pathology is a common mixed pathology; is related to increased likelihood of expressing clinical Alzheimer's-type dementia; and that TDP-43 pathologic stage is an important determinant of clinical Alzheimer's-type dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 398 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data suggest that AD pathology is more likely to be clinically expressed as dementia in women than in men. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 57 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The study aim was to describe the temporal course of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 226 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is commonly associated with more than 1 neuropathology, usually Alzheimer disease with cerebrovascular pathology. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 179 persons (average age, 86.9 years) with probable AD, 87.7% had pathologically confirmed AD, and 45.8% had mixed pathologies, most commonly AD with macroscopic infarcts (n = 54), followed by AD with neocortical LB disease (n = 19) and both (n = 8). 1 key finding →
Participants: 54 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nearly all persons had at least some AD pathology. 3 key findings →
Participants: 180 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients with MCI had a predominant memory impairment with relative sparing of other cognitive domains and were intermediate between clinically normal individuals and patients with AD on cognitive and functional ratings. 3 key findings →
Participants: 769 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
To assess the value of exosomal miRNAs as biomarkers for Alzheimer disease (AD), the expression of microRNAs was measured in a plasma fraction enriched in exosomes by differential centrifugation, using Illumina deep sequencing. 4 key findings →
Participants: 35 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral infarctions independently contribute to the likelihood of dementia but do not interact with AD pathology to increase the likelihood of dementia beyond their additive effect. 2 key findings →
Participants: 153 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Declining body mass index (BMI) is associated with increased risk of incident Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 151 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This influential 2018 paper proposed defining Alzheimer's disease by what is happening biologically in the brain (amyloid plaques, tau tangles, and neuron loss, measured by scans or spinal fluid tests) instead of by memory symptoms alone. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →