28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Neuroinflammation and cerebrovascular dysfunction are early events occurring already at presymptomatic stages of AD and contribute to disease progression. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 508 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Study objectives To investigate the cumulative effect of five consecutive nights of partial sleep deprivation (PSD) on a panel of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers in healthy adults. 1 key finding →
Participants: 13 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In anticipation of the emergence of more reliable CSF analysis platforms, the manuscript offers important guidance to health-care practitioners and suggestions for implementation and future research. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Baseline biomarkers largely do not predict risk for developing ARIA-E. ARIA-E was associated with significant longitudinal changes in several biomarkers, with larger reductions in amyloid PET and CSF p-tau and t-tau concentrations, and paradoxically greater hippocampal volume reduction and ventricular enlargement, suggesting that ARIA-E in bapineuzumab-treated cases may be related to increased Aβ efflux from the brain and affecting downstream pathogenic processes. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,512 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Compare cognitive and hippocampal volume trajectories in asymptomatic middle-aged and older adults with positive CSF markers of β-amyloid (Aβ) or tau to adults without an Alzheimer disease (AD)-associated biomarker profile. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 78 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results provide evidence that, in the absence of significant neurodegenerative processes, individuals who harbor AD neuropathology may remain cognitively unimpaired. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 79 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings provide additional insight into gut microbial involvement in AD and add to the growing understanding of the gut-brain axis. 2 key findings →
Participants: 410 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Inflammatory markers have been shown to predict neurocognitive outcomes in aging adults; however, the degree to which peripheral markers mirror the central nervous system remains unknown. 5 key findings →
Participants: 173 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Novel and established cerebrospinal fluid markers perform with at least fair accuracy in the discrimination between ADD and FTD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 41 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is a need for an accessible biomarker that can complement current cerebrospinal fluid and imaging biomarkers in an accurate and early diagnosis of Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings support an association between neuroaxonal injury and delirium. 3 key findings →
Participants: 130 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
Following the development of the first methods to measure the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers total-tau (T-tau), phosphorylated tau (P-tau) and the 42 amino acid form of amyloid-β (Aβ42), there has been an enormous expansion of this scientific research area. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The aggregation of fibrils of hyperphosphorylated and C-terminally truncated microtubule-associated tau protein characterizes 80% of all dementia disorders, the most common neurodegenerative disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Accumulating data from the clinical research support that the core Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers amyloid-β (Aβ42), total tau (T-tau), and phosphorylated tau (P-tau) reflect key elements of AD pathophysiology. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The past five years have seen an enormous development in the field of fluid biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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 (3.6% 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 →