Neurofilament proteins have been validated as specific body fluid biomarkers of neuro-axonal injury. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Compared with controls, patients with idiopathic REM sleep behaviour disorder had decreased colonic 11 C-donepezil uptake (-0·322, 95% CI -0·112 to -0·531; p=0·0020), 123 I-MIBG heart:mediastinum ratio (-0·508, -0·353 to -0·664; p 18 F-DOPA uptake (Ki; -0·0023, -0·0009 to -0·0037; p=0·0013). 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In cell culture experiments, flupirtine maleate (FLU), a triaminopyridine compound, was able to protect neuronal cells from apoptotic cell death induced by prion protein fragments and beta-amyloid peptides. 4 key findings →
Participants: 13 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Neuroinflammation in the form of microglial activation is present in synucleinopathies and is a potential therapeutic target to halt or delay the neurodegenerative process. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The aim of this study was to assess the agreement between data on cerebral amyloidosis, derived using Pittsburgh compound B positron emission tomography and (i) multi-laboratory INNOTEST enzyme linked immunosorbent assay derived cerebrospinal fluid concentrations of amyloid-β42; (ii) centrally measured cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β42 using a Meso Scale Discovery enzyme linked immunosorbent assay; and (iii) cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β42 centrally measured using an antibody-independent mass spectrometry-based reference method. 3 key findings →
Participants: 243 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are two related currently incurable neurodegenerative diseases. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Furthermore, the CSF biomarker analyses provide a first insight into the potentially predominant pathogenetic mechanism(s) underlying the association between AD risk and PICALM. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 4,254 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biochemical markers (biomarkers) Amyloidβ 42 (Aβ 42 ), total Tau (T-tau) and Tau phosphorylated at threonine 181 (P-tau 181 ) have proven diagnostic accuracy for mild cognitive impairment and dementia due to Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of amyloid beta peptides ending at positions 42 and 40 (Abeta42 and Abeta40, respectively), and total tau (tTau) protein were measured by ELISA in order to compare their accuracy in discriminating patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD, n = 22), non-Alzheimer dementia (nAD, n = 11) and control subjects (CON, n=35). 4 key findings →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Human lumbar CSF patterns of Abeta peptides were analysed by urea-based beta-amyloid sodium dodecyl sulphate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis with western immunoblot (Abeta-SDS-PAGE/immunoblot). 4 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The analysis of 14-3-3 protein in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was shown to be highly sensitive and specific for the diagnosis of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is an irreversible, devastating neurodegenerative brain disorder characterized by the loss of neurons and subsequent cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Blood-based tests for the differential diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) are under intensive investigation and have shown promising results with regard to Abeta40 and Abeta42 peptide species in incipient AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of neurodegenerative dementia and there is no cure to date. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples from 33 patients with Alzheimer dementia (AD), 21 patients with mild cognitive impairment who converted to AD during followup (MCI-AD), 25 patients with stable mild cognitive impairment (MCI-stable), and 16 nondemented subjects (ND) were analyzed with a chemiluminescence immunoassay to assess the levels of the mitogen-activated protein kinase ERK1/2 (extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2). 4 key findings →
Participants: 33 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Where “Free full text” comes from
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
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
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.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
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.
What this library is — and isn't
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 →