31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Plasma p-tau217 and tau positron emission tomography (PET) are strong prognostic biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease (AD), but their relative performance in predicting future cognitive decline among cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals is unclear. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,474 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 171 Aβ-positive CU participants included in the main analyses, 119 (mean [SD] age, 73.0 [5.4] years; 60.5% female) were from the BioFINDER-1 study, and 52 (mean [SD] age, 64.4 [4.6] years; 65.4% female) were from the WRAP study. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 564 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of a total 912 participants, there were 499 males (54.7%) and 413 females (45.3%), and the mean (SD) age was 71.1 (8.49) years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 912 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 1431 participants, the mean (SD) age was 71.2 (8.8) years; 751 (52.5%) were male. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,135 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the emergence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) disease-modifying therapies, identifying patients who could benefit from these treatments becomes critical. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,422 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this prospective cohort study, we included adults aged 40 years or older with subjective cognitive decline, mild cognitive impairment, or dementia, based on cognitive test results and clinical assessments, consecutively recruited at two memory clinics in Sweden, as part of the Swedish BioFINDER-2 study. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 572 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants had a mean (SD) age of 66.9 (9.9) years; 971 (33.3%) were Aβ positive by either CSF or PET, 1667 (57.2%) were women, and 1108 (38.1%) carried at least 1 APOE ε4 allele. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,916 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mean age was 74.2 years (SD, 8.3 years), 48% were women, 23% had subjective cognitive decline, 44% had mild cognitive impairment, and 33% had dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 307 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 343 participants, the mean (SD) age was 72.56 (7.24) years, and 157 (51.1%) were female. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 343 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study found that CSF-based estimates using adjusted data-driven cutoffs were up to 10% higher than PET-based estimates in people without dementia, whereas the results were similar among people with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 97 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data support the use of cNfL as a biomarker of neuroaxonal damage and indicate that age-specific and sex-specific (and in some cases disease-specific) reference values may be needed. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,795 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The BioFINDER-2 main cohort included 872 participants, with an additional 156 participants in the Knight ADRC cohort for independent validation. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,028 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neurofilament proteins have been validated as specific body fluid biomarkers of neuro-axonal injury. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Aggregated insoluble tau is one of two defining features of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Participants: 448 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Both high baseline GFAP (hazard ratio 3·6, 95% CI 2·2-5·7; p 42/40 , both GFAP (2·6, 1·4-5·0; p=0·0026) and amyloid β 42/40 (2·1, 1·2-3·6; p=0·0091) were independently associated with incident dementia whereas NfL was not (1·4, 0·8-2·5; p=0·28). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 300 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among individuals presenting with SCD at a memory clinic, those with a biomarker profile A-T+N+, A+T-N-, A+T+N-, and A+T+N+ were at increased risk of dementia, and showed steeper cognitive decline compared to A-T-N- individuals. 4 key findings →
Participants: 385 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mean (SD) follow-up was 4.8 (2.6) years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 298 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We constructed models for MCI and mild dementia that predict MMSE over time. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 961 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Obicetrapib significantly slowed AD biomarker progression over 12 months in participants with ASCVD, with the greatest effects in ApoE4 carriers. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Anti-amyloid treatments for early symptomatic Alzheimer disease have recently become clinically available in some countries, which has greatly increased the need for biomarker confirmation of amyloid pathology. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Blood-based markers (BBMs) have recently shown promise to revolutionize the diagnostic and prognostic work-up of Alzheimer's disease (AD), as well as to improve the design of interventional trials.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid PET results were positive for 242 patients (48%). 4 key findings →
Participants: 866 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The proposed novel, pragmatic method to determine CSF biomarker cutoffs for AD does not require assessment of other biomarkers or assumptions concerning the clinical diagnosis of patients. 1 key finding →
Participants: 497 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study reviewed the structure, function, analytical aspects, and age-dependent normal ranges of neurofilaments, providing a comprehensive overview of neurofilament light chain as a marker of axonal injury across various neurological disorders. 2 key findings →
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Disease staging, whereby the spatial extent and load of brain pathology are used to estimate the severity of Alzheimer disease (AD), is pivotal to the gold-standard neuropathological diagnosis of AD. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 31,380 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.
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events