Fosgonimeton and placebo were shown to be safe and well-tolerated across all doses. 5 key findings →
Participants: 48 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Compared with placebo, the amino acid mixture did not improve NPI-12, MMSE, TMT-A and B or CDR scores. 4 key findings →
Participants: 36 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
No differences between treated groups and placebo in adverse events or in study completion. 5 key findings →
Participants: 542 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonist and antidiabetic drug, has shown neuroprotective effects in animal models. 3 key findings →
Design: phase-2-trial Participants: 204 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Twenty-four week supplementation with 900 mg/d DHA improved learning and memory function in ARCD and is a beneficial supplement that supports cognitive health with aging. 3 key findings →
Participants: 485 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We aimed to assess whether continued treatment with antipsychotics in people with AD is associated with an increased risk of mortality. 5 key findings →
Participants: 165 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Future research is warranted to examine the mechanistic basis of treatment differences, and to further assess the efficacy and safety of intranasal insulin. 4 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Group 3 showed less decrease in the SIB score at 12 and 24 weeks compared with group 1 (P < 0.05). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Comparing with the placebo group (n = 83, change - 1.45), the ADAS-cog12 score change in the GV-971 600-mg group (n = 76) was - 1.39 (p = 0.89) and the GV-971 900-mg group (n = 83) was - 2.58 (p = 0.30). 5 key findings →
Participants: 83 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals with cognitive profiles consistent with probable executive MCI were identified using simple assessments of global cognition, memory and executive functions in a community-dwelling older population. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 161 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Probiotics have been proposed to ameliorate cognitive impairment and depressive disorder via the gut-brain axis in patients and experimental animal models. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A low-dose regimen of prednisone is not useful in the treatment of AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 138 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Promotion of person centred care and good practice in the management of patients with dementia with behavioural symptoms provides an effective alternative to neuroleptics. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A growing number of investigations are exploring the utility of intranasal insulin as a means of mitigating cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
77/100
Patients treated with galantamine 24 mg/day had a significantly better outcome than placebo on ADAS-cog; the treatment difference was 3 points on the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis ( p = 0.01) and 4.2 points on per protocol analysis ( p = 0.001). 4 key findings →
Participants: 285 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Gradual up-titration of dose significantly reduced ARIA-E risk while demonstrating comparable pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics compared to standard dosing. 5 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 843 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between Aug 23, 2010, and Nov 25, 2014, 326 men were enrolled, of whom 163 were randomly assigned to radical retropubic prostatectomy and 163 to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. 18 withdrew (12 assigned to radical retropubic prostatectomy and six assigned to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy); thus, 151 in the radical retropubic prostatectomy group proceeded to surgery and 157 in the robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy group. 121 assigned to radical retropubic prostatectomy completed the 12 week questionnaire versus 131 assigned to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 14 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In APOE4/4 homozygotes receiving 150mg BID tramiprosate, efficacy in the traditional Mild AD patients (MMSE 20-26) was higher than the overall group (MMSE 16-26) and efficacy in the Mild patients (MMSE 22-26) was highest. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 147 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
No beneficial effects were observed in the dual primary outcome measures for the 2 IVIg doses tested. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 390 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Four-week changes in NPI-Q total scores did not differ significantly between the treatment and placebo groups. 5 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PBT2 is a copper/zinc ionophore that rapidly restores cognition in mouse models of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 1795 participants were enrolled (lecanemab:898; placebo:897). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,795 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The safety profile was similar for 20 μg treatment and placebo patients. 5 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
No difference was seen in Clinical Global Impression scores between patients receiving placebo and those receiving linopirdine (n = 189). 4 key findings →
Participants: 382 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Twenty-five out of 44 completed the trial. 5 key findings →
Participants: 25 Evidence: high
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 28,180 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.
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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →