30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
According to our findings, the identification of autonomic dysfunction seems to be of great importance in clinical practice, not only to avoid falls and other complications, but also as a possible predictor of survival. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 36 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer disease pathologic changes are common in DLB and are associated with the clinical phenotype. β-Amyloid is associated with cognitive impairment, and tau pathology is associated with lower frequency of clinical features of DLB. 5 key findings →
Participants: 417 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We used a sensitive and specific beta-site amyloid precursor protein (APP)-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) assay to determine the relationship between BACE1 activity in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and markers of APP metabolism and axonal degeneration in early and late stages of Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 113 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
During follow-up, 57 (42%) patients with MCI developed Alzheimer's disease, 21 (15%) developed other forms of dementia, and 56 (41%) remained cognitively stable for 5.2 years (range 4.0-6.8). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A subgroup of patients with Alzheimer disease with extreme levels of CSF biomarkers exhibits worse clinical outcomes over time, including faster progression of cognitive deficits, no response to ChEI treatment, and a higher mortality. 1 key finding →
Participants: 151 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Changes in CSF biomarker levels may identify early neurodegenerative processes of Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Serine protease inhibitors (serpins), the acute phase reactants and regulators of the proteolytic processing of proteins, have been recognized as potential contributors to the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 258 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study suggests that the level of Aβ38 can potentially contribute in the diagnostic distinction between AD and DLB when combined with Aβ42. 3 key findings →
Participants: 85 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mixed pathologies of α-synuclein, β-amyloid and tau are relatively common in Parkinson's disease (PD) and Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB). 5 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Numerous studies have shown a marked decrease of beta-amyloid(42) (Abeta(42)) in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of patients with incipient Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The AD subjects showed positive correlations between CSF-T-tau and CSF-P-tau versus CSF-Mn (r(s) = 0.22, p = 0.004; r(s) = 0.18, p = 0.021). 4 key findings →
Participants: 264 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The presence of concomitant Alzheimer pathology has been linked to earlier death in cases with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events