We identified 2 core dimensions of heterogeneity: typicality and severity. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
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.
Computer-aided diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a rapidly developing field of neuroimaging with strong potential to be used in practice. 4 key findings →
Participants: 165 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings illuminate the potential benefits of ChEI treatment in DLB patients. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,095 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results demonstrate an important role of clusterin in the pathogenesis of AD and suggest that alterations in amyloid chaperone proteins may be a biologically relevant peripheral signature of AD. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A framework for multi-centre MRI studies of Alzheimer's disease has been established consisting of a harmonized MRI acquisition protocol across centres, rigorous QC at both the sites and central data analysis hub and an automated image analysis pipeline. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 378 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We have identified 10 plasma proteins strongly associated with disease severity and disease progression. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,148 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) based on non-invasive methods are highly desirable for diagnosis, disease progression, and monitoring therapeutics. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The European Union AddNeuroMed program and the US-based Alzheimer Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) are two large multi-center initiatives designed to collect and validate biomarker data for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,074 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
55/100
Amyloid-positive cognitively healthy participants showed a significant increase in mI/creatine and mI/NAA levels compared to amyloid-negative healthy elderly (p Conclusions mI levels are elevated already at asymptomatic stages of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
Dementia is one of the most common and important aspects of Parkinson's disease and has consequences for patients and caregivers, and has health-related costs. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our proof-of-concept study is the first to show that microstructural and macrostructural changes can reflect underlying neuroinflammatory mechanisms in early stages of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings confirm that MCI is associated with widespread cortical atrophy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous research has described distinct subtypes of Alzheimer's disease (AD) based on the differences in regional patterns of brain atrophy on MRI. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Late-life depression (LLD) is associated with development of different types of dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 185 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
42/100
Two independent cohorts were used in this study. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Machine learning algorithms and multivariate data analysis methods have been widely utilized in the field of Alzheimer's disease (AD) research in recent years. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
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 27,380 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 →