27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Creatinine and BMI are related to certain plasma biomarkers levels, but they do not have clinically relevant confounding effects for the vast majority of individuals. 1 key finding →
Participants: 748 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A combination of plasma Aβ42/Aβ40 and p-tau217 discriminated Aβ status with relatively high accuracy, whereas p-tau217 showed strongest associations with Aβ pathology in MCI but not in CU. 1 key finding →
Participants: 591 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We examined whether plasma p-tau181 and p-tau217 are specific biomarkers of pathologically confirmed Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is currently incurable, but there is general agreement that a minimally invasive blood biomarker for screening in preclinical stages would be crucial for future therapy. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Treatment-resistant schizophrenia does not appear to be associated with neuronal, particularly axonal degeneration. 4 key findings →
Participants: 82 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Genetic pathways implicated in causing AD are related to altered levels of soluble tau through both Aβ-dependent and Aβ-independent mechanisms, which may have relevance for anti-tau drug development. 3 key findings →
Participants: 751 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
HIGHLIGHTS: Different plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau) species reflect different pathological processes of Alzheimer's disease (AD), with p-tau231 showing the greatest association with the earliest increases in brain amyloid beta (Aβ) accumulation, while p-tau217 shows greater association with both brain Aβ and early tau pathology, and other p-tau and tau fragment species show greater association with later stages of brain tau pathology. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Clinical prediction models combining plasma biomarkers-particularly p-tau217-exhibit high performance and are less effected by random error. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It is currently unclear how amyloid-β and tau deposition are linked to changes in synaptic function and axonal structure over the course of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent studies highlight phosphorylated tau (p-tau) at threonine tau 217 (p-tau217) as a new promising plasma biomarker for pathological changes implicated in Alzheimer's disease (AD), but the specific brain pathological events related to the alteration in p-tau217 plasma levels are still largely unknown. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurodegenerative disorders such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) represent a mounting public health challenge. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mild behavioral impairment (MBI) is suggested as risk marker for neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The links between β-amyloid (Aβ) and tau in Alzheimer's disease are unclear. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Strong αSyn SAA positivity was detected in 24/443 patients with ALS (5.4%); overall positivity, including weak-positive samples, was 37/443 (8.4%). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 248 Evidence: moderate
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 27,380 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.
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 →