The primary cohort included 91 AAs and 868 NHWs. 4 key findings →
Participants: 91 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
CSF NfL is a non-specific marker of aging and white matter integrity with limited sensitivity to specific markers of AD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 71 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Relationships between CSF biomarkers but not imaging biomarkers varied by racialized groups. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Heterogeneity in progression to Alzheimer's disease (AD) poses challenges for both clinical prognosis and clinical trial implementation. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aims to quantify microglial activation in individuals with Alzheimer disease (AD) using the 18-kDa translocator protein (TSPO) PET imaging in the hippocampus and precuneus, the 2 AD-vulnerable regions, and to evaluate the association of baseline neuroinflammation with amyloidosis, tau, and longitudinal cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CSF biomarkers and amyloid positron emission tomography reflect different aspects of Alzheimer's disease brain pathology, and therefore, less-than-perfect correspondence is expected. 1 key finding →
Participants: 200 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The gFC was reduced in MC compared with NC participants. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 171 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Alzheimer's Disease (AD) biomarker levels have identified novel genes implicated in disease risk, onset and progression. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,467 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study identified the plasma biomarker analytes and assays that most accurately classified amyloid pathology and other AD-related outcomes. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease involves a drastic departure from the cognitive, functional, and behavioural trajectory of normal ageing, and is both a dreaded and highly prevalent cause of disability to individuals, and a leading source of health and social care expenditure for society. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer disease (AD) and Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias (AD/ADRD) are growing public health challenges globally affecting millions of older adults, necessitating concerted efforts to advance our understanding and management of these conditions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings suggest that NfL can be used to monitor cognitive decline in aging and Alzheimer's disease and that an attentional control composite may be a better outcome for tracking general neurodegenerative effects on cognition. 3 key findings →
Participants: 255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Incorporating AD blood tests into screening for AD clinical trials may reduce the time and financial cost of enrollment. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
41/100
Attentional fluctuations over 20-40 seconds assessed in daily life, are sensitive to clinical status and genetic risk for AD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Assay drift may reduce statistical power or even confound analyses. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Obesity is related to quantitative neuroimaging abnormalities including reduced gray matter volumes and impaired white matter microstructural integrity, although the underlying mechanisms are not well understood. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundAir pollution has been almost exclusively measured by region-level ambient exposure of particulate matter (PM) from government agencies (e.g., EPA), which does not capture the potentially large within-region variation and takes no consideration of human mobility in daily life. 4 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 (3.7% 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 →