28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Plasma biomarkers of AD neuropathology, neuronal injury, and astrogliosis increase with age and are associated with known dementia risk factors. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,525 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
US clinical practice guidelines for the diagnostic evaluation of cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) or AD and related dementias (ADRD) are decades old and aimed at specialists. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic-review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study demonstrated statistically significant differences between physostigmine and placebo on both a performance-based cognitive functioning instrument and a clinician's global evaluation. 5 key findings →
Participants: 366 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We created global rating scoring rules for the CDR ® plus NACC FTLD to detect and track early frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and to conduct clinical trials in FTLD. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 40 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients who failed to meet revised criteria were significantly older and most had atypical presentations with marked memory impairment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
More-severe diabetes (defined by higher HbA 1c and longer disease duration) but not prediabetes or less-severe diabetes was associated with smaller brain volumes and an increased burden of brain vascular pathology. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,713 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Levels of CSF Abeta42 decrease and levels of CSF tau increase in AD. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 74 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients and their study partners who were enrolled in a clinical trial supported proxy consent both for themselves and as a matter of policy. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Based on informant report, disturbed arousal and disorganized speech are specific aspects of fluctuations in dementia with Lewy bodies that reliably distinguish dementia with Lewy bodies from Alzheimer's disease and normal aging. 4 key findings →
Participants: 200 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Midlife hypertension and elevated midlife but not late-life systolic BP was associated with more cognitive decline during the 20 years of the study. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The CDR® plus NACC FTLD was able to detect early symptoms in the mildly impaired participants who were rated as CDR® sum of boxes (CDR®-SB) = 0. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among mild to moderate AD patients, enrolled in an actual clinical trial, these results suggest evidence based guidelines for using the MacCAT-CR understanding subscale to help guide judgments about whether a patient has the capacity to consent. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
[ 18 F]flutemetamol data can now be expressed in Centiloid units, enhancing its utility in clinical and research applications for β-amyloid imaging. 2 key findings →
Participants: 74 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The cognitive assessment protocol of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) was designed to evaluate the reliability and validity of cognitive assessment measures that might be valuable additions to the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS) or other concise batteries used in antidementia drug trials. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These findings indicate that among Lewy body disease cases that pass through a mild cognitive impairment stage, any cognitive pattern or mild cognitive subtype is possible, with the attention/executive and visuospatial domains most frequently impaired. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Scientific evidence continues to demonstrate the linkage of vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia such as Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There are many who feel that the achievement of a disease-modifying (DM) designation for a drug is an important goal in Alzheimer disease (AD) therapeutics. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 →