Hippocampal volume may index disease severity and predict progression in AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 120 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Empathy is a complex social behaviour mediated by a network of brain structures. 3 key findings →
Participants: 123 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The frontal lobes are most severely affected by SIVD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 78 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In one of the largest brain MRI studies to date, we used tensor-based morphometry (TBM) to create 3D maps of structural atrophy in 676 subjects with Alzheimer's disease (AD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and healthy elderly controls, scanned as part of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). 4 key findings →
Participants: 676 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on previous studies, a preclinical classification for Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been proposed. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 160 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is used widely for assessment of patients with cognitive impairment, but the pathological correlates are unclear, especially when multiple pathologies are present. 4 key findings →
Participants: 93 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with healthy controls, adults with SCA had poorer cognitive performance, which was associated with anemia and age. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 149 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil was relatively well tolerated; adverse events were consistent with current labeling. 2 key findings →
Participants: 974 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) can be difficult to differentiate clinically because of overlapping symptoms. 5 key findings →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hippocampal sclerosis (HS) is a common and often asymmetric neuropathological finding among elderly persons who experience progressive memory loss, but its cause is unknown and it is rarely diagnosed during life. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADNI-3 will aim to inform AD treatment trials and facilitate development of AD disease-modifying treatments. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Plans for the next phase of the ADNI project include maintaining longitudinal follow-up of the normal and mild cognitive impairment cohorts, augmenting specific clinical cohorts, and incorporating novel computerized cognitive assessments and patient-reported outcomes. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) beginning in October 2004, is a 6-year research project that studies changes of cognition, function, brain structure and function, and biomarkers in elderly controls, subjects with mild cognitive impairment, and subjects with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), launched in 2004, has worked to accelerate drug development by validating imaging and blood/cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease clinical treatment trials. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
Mild cognitive impairment can represent a transitional state between normal ageing and Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Participants: 49 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
As one of the first attempts to use an imaging technique that does not require amyloid-specific radioligands for identification of individuals with brain amyloidosis, our findings could lead to development of multidisciplinary/multimodality brain amyloidosis biomarkers that are reliable, minimally invasive, and widely available. 3 key findings →
Participants: 62 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
Autopsy studies of Alzheimer's disease (AD) have found that neurofibrillary tangle (NFT) pathology of the medial temporal lobe (MTL) demonstrates selective topography with relatively stereotyped subregional involvement at early disease stages, prompting interest in more granular measurement of these structures with in vivo magnetic resonance imaging. 4 key findings →
Participants: 86 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
We studied the biomarker signatures and prognoses of 3 different subtle cognitive impairment (SCI) groups (executive, memory, and multidomain) as well as the subjective memory complaints (SMC) group. 4 key findings →
Participants: 522 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The two main findings of this paper are (i) the posterior default mode network fails before measurable amyloid plaques and appears to initiate a connectivity cascade that continues throughout the disease spectrum; and (ii) high connectivity between the posterior default mode network and hubs of high connectivity (many located in the frontal lobe) is associated with amyloid accumulation. 2 key findings →
Participants: 128 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive age-related neurodegenerative disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Brain imaging with diffusion-weighted MRI (dMRI) is sensitive to microstructural white matter (WM) changes associated with brain aging and neurodegeneration. 4 key findings →
Participants: 317 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Functional decline is associated with risk and can be efficiently assessed by participants and study partners (SPs). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADNI has had a profound impact in improving clinical trials for AD. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Degeneration of language regions in the dominant hemisphere can result in primary progressive aphasia (PPA), a clinical syndrome characterized by progressive deficits in speech and/or language function. 4 key findings →
Participants: 86 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Subcortical lacunes were not related to cognitive measures independent of effects of other MRI variables. 3 key findings →
Participants: 157 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →