Hearing loss is independently associated with incident all-cause dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 639 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.
Early identification of patterns of abnormality is of fundamental importance for detecting disease onset and tracking progression. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,017 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
69/100
Among 2766 participants (mean [SD] age, 69.9 [3.8] years; 486 [17.9%] Black, 196 [7.1%] Hispanic, and 2007 [73.9%] White), 1311 developed the combined end point of MCI or dementia (849 participants with MCI and 752 participants with dementia). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 2,766 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), we examined the temporal unfolding of declining performance on tests of episodic memory (Free Recall on the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test), executive function (Category Fluency, Letter Fluency, and Trails), and Verbal Intelligence (Nelson, 1982; American Version of the Nelson Adult Reading Test [AMNART]) before the diagnosis of dementia in 92 subjects with incident Alzheimer's disease (AD) followed for up to 15 years before diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 92 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebrovascular disease is a significant and potentially preventable cause of dementia in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 179 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
64/100
Higher Abeta deposition is associated with greater longitudinal decline in mental status and verbal memory in the preceding years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 57 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A challenge in developing informative neuroimaging biomarkers for early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease is the need to identify biomarkers that are evident before the onset of clinical symptoms, and which have sufficient sensitivity and specificity on an individual patient basis. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hearing loss is independently associated with lower scores on tests of memory and executive function. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 347 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The pathologic changes of Alzheimer disease (AD) evolve very gradually over decades before the disease becomes clinically manifest. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 15 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We examined longitudinal associations between the apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (ApoE4(+) status) and several cognitive outcomes and tested effect modification by sex. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 113 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings suggest that APOE epsilon4-mediated risk for Alzheimer disease is associated with widespread decline in rCBF over time that precedes the onset of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We systematically compared structural imaging patterns of advanced brain aging (ABA) in the general-population, herein defined as significant deviation from typical BA to those found in Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,705 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We believe this to be the first demonstration of myelin loss in MCI, Alzheimer's disease, and vascular dementia using a method that provides a quantitative magnetic resonance imaging-based measure of myelin. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In younger controls, SUV peak was observed in the temporal lobe with values of approximately 3.0 for 11 C-RO-963, 1.5 for 11 C-RO-643, and 3.5 for 18 F-RO-948. 5 key findings →
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 →