31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We tested the hypothesis that plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) identifies asymptomatic carriers of familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD)-causing mutations at risk of disease progression. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 277 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
DNA methylation algorithms are increasingly used to estimate biological aging; however, how these proposed measures of whole-organism biological aging relate to aging in the brain is not known. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 649 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We created global rating scoring rules for the CDR ® plus NACC FTLD to detect and track early frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) and to conduct clinical trials in FTLD. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 40 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We analyzed data from 11,709 participants without a history of coronary heart disease or stroke who attended the baseline examination (1987-1989) of the prospective Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. 4 key findings →
Participants: 11,709 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Because cardiovascular (CV) risk factors have been associated with declines in cognitive functions and late life dementia, CV risk factors should also be associated with brain atrophy. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,812 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Even before dementia becomes apparent, cognitive decline may contribute to deterioration in oral health. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 10,050 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The interplay between midlife vascular risk factors and midlife cognitive function with later life mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia (DEM) is not well understood. 4 key findings →
Participants: 5,995 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We tested the hypotheses that higher levels of and persistence of midlife leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) are associated long-term with lower cognitive decline and less incident dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 10,705 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Identifying clinical measures that track disease in the earliest stages of frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is important for clinical trials. 4 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early identification of dementia at the stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is crucial for timely diagnosis and intervention of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this article, the authors aim to maximally utilize multimodality neuroimaging and genetic data for identifying Alzheimer's disease (AD) and its prodromal status, Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), from normal aging subjects. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Clinical studies have shown alterations in metabolic profiles when patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease dementia were compared to cognitively normal subjects. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,534 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fusing multi-modality data is crucial for accurate identification of brain disorder as different modalities can provide complementary perspectives of complex neurodegenerative disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral atrophy, detected as ventricular enlargement or sulcal widening on MRI, is recognized as a risk factor for vascular dementia or Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Meeting the care needs of people with dementia is a major public health and societal challenge. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The National Dementia Workforce Study was designed to improve our understanding of the individuals and systems who care for people with dementia, but designing and implementing such a study is challenging due to the large number of patient care organizations, clinical and direct care roles, and locations in which care is provided. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Deep-learning methods (especially convolutional neural networks) using structural magnetic resonance imaging (sMRI) data have been successfully applied to computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and its prodromal stage [i.e., mild cognitive impairment (MCI)]. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 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