27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We have developed MCI risk scores using variables easily assessable in the clinical setting and that may be useful in routine patient care. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The consistency of MRI measurements obtained across sites, and the consistency between the multisite milameline data and that obtained in prior single-site studies, demonstrate the technical feasibility of using structural MRI measures as a surrogate endpoint of disease progression in therapeutic trials. 1 key finding →
Participants: 362 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A slower rate of hippocampal atrophy in normal APOE2 carriers is consistent with the lower risk of Alzheimer disease in these individuals. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 72 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Imaging patterns of atrophy in CBS vary according to pathologic diagnosis. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 24 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This cross-sectional evaluation of the NIA-AA criteria for preclinical AD indicates that the 1-3 staging criteria coupled with stage 0 and SNAP categories classify 97% of CN subjects from a population-based sample, leaving only 3% unclassified. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This roughly 15-year interval where the slope of the amyloid SUVR vs time curve is greatest and roughly linear represents a large therapeutic window for secondary preventive interventions. 1 key finding →
Participants: 246 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
To be diagnostically useful, structural MRI must reliably distinguish Alzheimer's disease (AD) from normal aging in individual scans. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Treatment options for Alzheimer disease (AD) are limited and have focused mainly on symptomatic therapy and improving quality of life. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
(1) Data-driven AD progression models supported multifactorial interactions rather than a linear cascade of events. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The distribution of microbleeds revealed different associations with amyloid-β and phosphorylated tau 181 protein levels and cognition. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 626 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These data support the use of rates of change from serial MRI studies in addition to standard clinical/psychometric measures as surrogate markers of disease progression in AD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 55 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In contrast to no change in global cortical SUVR in the CU- and CU+ groups during the 2-y period, global cortical SUVR increased by 0.06 (2.9%) in the MCI+ group and 0.19 (8.0%) in the DEM+ group at follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 107 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The new criteria for AD are presented in three documents. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We evaluated a new magnetic resonance (MR)-based technique for performing volumetric measurements of temporal lobe structures. 3 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Individuals with an isolated pathologic diagnosis of AD, hippocampal sclerosis, frontotemporal degeneration, and neurofibrillary tangle--only degeneration usually had substantial hippocampal atrophy, while those with changes of typical aging did not. 2 key findings →
Participants: 67 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The incidence of amyloid PET positivity is approximately 13% per year among CN participants over age 70 sampled from a population-based cohort. 4 key findings →
Participants: 207 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Biomarker trajectory shapes by MMSE score were complex and were affected by interactions with age and APOE status. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 343 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based volumetric measurements of medial temporal lobe (MTL) structures can discriminate between normal elderly control subjects and patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) of moderate to advanced severity. 1 key finding →
Participants: 94 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During follow-up, 13 healthy patients converted to MCI or Alzheimer disease (AD), whereas 39 MCI subjects converted to AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 72 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) was used to assess patterns of grey matter atrophy in the aMCI subjects at each time-point compared to the control group. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In one of the largest brain MRI studies to date, we used tensor-based morphometry (TBM) to create 3D maps of structural atrophy in 676 subjects with Alzheimer's disease (AD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and healthy elderly controls, scanned as part of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). 4 key findings →
Participants: 676 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients with Alzheimer's disease have reduced cerebral blood flow measured by arterial spin labelling magnetic resonance imaging, but it is unclear how this is related to amyloid-β pathology. 4 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A statistically significant yearly decline in hippocampal volume and an increase in temporal horn volume was identified in elderly control subjects who represent typical aging individuals. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 24 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We used multinomial regression models to estimate discrimination [concordance (C) statistics] among three amyloid PET stages (low, intermediate, high), four tau PET stages (Braak 0, 1-2, 3-4, 5-6) and a combined amyloid and tau PET stage (none/low versus intermediate/high severity) using plasma biomarkers as predictors separately within unimpaired and impaired individuals. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,136 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 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 →