30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Studies reported data 1989-2008. The rate of screening for breast cancer by mammography was lower in women with cognitive impairment or dementia compared with those without (pooled odds ratio [OR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.71, 0.91], p = .0007, six studies, N = 18,562). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 18,562 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Key points Lower kidney function is associated with higher concentrations of blood biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease and related dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 62,503 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 18 high-quality studies comprising 24 independent datasets and 4,736 participants were included. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 4,736 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The analyzed parameters differentiate between controls and CAA with clinically useful accuracy (AUC > ∼0.85) but not between CAA and AD. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Identifying Aβ-positive individuals, irrespective of the measurement technique employed (CSF or PET), enables the detection of the most at-risk population before disease onset, or at least at a mild stage. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 7,793 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The likelihood of amyloid positivity was associated with age and APOE ε4 status. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 377 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The core biomarkers differentiated Alzheimer's disease from controls with good performance: CSF T-tau (average ratio 2·54, 95% CI 2·44-2·64, p Interpretation The core CSF biomarkers of neurodegeneration (T-tau, P-tau, and Aβ42), CSF NFL, and plasma T-tau were strongly associated with Alzheimer's disease and the core biomarkers were strongly associated with mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 699 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
FDA-approved anti-Aβ mabs have a role in slowing disease progression in patients with AD, at the cost of an increased probability of side effects. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 4,471 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma Aβ40 values might not distinguish between PET (+) and PET (-) people. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,047 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
All autonomic networks were positively associated with Aβ42/40 ratio and remained so after adjustment for age, sex, and APOE4 carrier status. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 122 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 24 published articles that included 2397 AD and 3242 MCI patients were analysed. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,397 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study investigated the potential association between levels of plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) and cognitive function in patients suffering from Parkinson's disease (PD) in P.R. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 168 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Blood-based biomarkers (BBM) are becoming easily detectable tools to reveal pathological changes in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 33 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
CSF Aβ42, t-tau, p-tau, tau/Aβ42; peripheral blood t-tau, Aβ42/Aβ40, NFL; whole, left and right HV, EC volume, MTA, 18 F-FDG PET, 11 C-PIB PET; APOE ε4 may be promising prospective biomarkers for AD progression. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 70 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Both t-tau and p-tau are suitable AD blood biomarkers, and p-tau217 is more sensitive than other tau biomarkers to differentiate MCI and AD. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 56 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We discovered age-dependent genetic effects, established associations between vascular-related genes (KLKB1, F12, PLIN2) and midlife plasma aβ levels, and identified a plausible Alzheimer's Disease candidate gene (ITPRIP) influencing cell death. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 725 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This meta-analysis pooled 30 studies (nearly 9,800 people from 10 countries) to see how well p-tau217 measured in blood or spinal fluid detects Alzheimer's amyloid and tau pathology compared with PET scans. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 9,787 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 17 articles were identified. Plasma Aβ42/40 ratio was inversely correlated with aPET positivity r = -0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.65--0.31). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This large review pooled 113 studies (nearly 30,000 people) comparing different forms of blood phosphorylated tau for detecting Alzheimer's pathology. p-tau217 was clearly the best-performing marker, correctly identifying disease pathology about 88% of the time, outperforming other tau variants like p-tau181. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 29,625 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Regardless of the laboratory technique, blood p-tau181 reliably differentiates A+ and A- subjects. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite significant progress, applications of astrocyte biomarkers in AD remain in their early days. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,204 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Association of cell-bound Aβ(1-40) in blood with left hippocampal volume was much stronger than previously observed in Aβ plasma fractions. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 96 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We demonstrated significant elevations in blood GFAP and YKL-40 levels in patients on the AD continuum compared with CU individuals. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,366 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings demonstrate that plasma p-tau217 can reliably detect AD pathology in the preclinical stage. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 7,834 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The results indicate that lithium treatment may have beneficial effects on cognitive performance in subjects with MCI and AD dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 199 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
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.
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 30,180 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.
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →