27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Good sleep is essential for health, yet associations between sleep and dementia risk remain incompletely understood. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 5,946 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Points• UK Biobank is a very large and detailed prospective study with over 500,000 participants aged 40-69 years when recruited in 2006-2010.• The study has collected and continues to collect extensive phenotypic and genotypic detail about its participants, including data from questionnaires, physical measures, sample assays, accelerometry, multimodal imaging, genome-wide genotyping and longitudinal follow-up for a wide range of health-related outcomes.• Wide consultation; input from scientific, management, legal, and ethical partners; and industrial-scale, centralised processes have been essential to the development of this resource.• UK Biobank is available for open access, without the need for collaboration, to any bona fide researcher who wishes to use it to conduct health-related research for the benefit of the public. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 500,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found that multiple sleep measures predicted future risk of stroke and dementia, but these associations were attenuated after controlling for cardiovascular risk factors and were absent in MR analyses for Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 502,383 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
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
The association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and incident dementia remains inconclusive. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 5,255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral accumulation of amyloid-β is thought to be the starting mechanism in Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 437 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The average life expectancy has increased substantially in the past few decades in most industrialized countries; however, not all of the increased life expectancy is being spent in optimal health, especially among individuals with low socioeconomic status. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 135 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hippocampal sclerosis of aging (HS-Aging) is a high-morbidity brain disease in the elderly but risk factors are largely unknown. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 624 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Periventricular white matter hyperintensities (WMH; PVWMH) and deep WMH (DWMH) are regional classifications of WMH and reflect proposed differences in cause. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 26,654 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Healthy cognitive ageing is a societal and public health priority. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22,059 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE-ε4 allele has long been associated with increased risks of Alzheimer's disease and mortality, but the effect of the less prevalent APOE-ε2 allele on diseases in the elderly and survival remains elusive. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 38,537 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The lack of strong association between brain beta-amyloid deposition and cognitive impairment has been a challenge for the Alzheimer's disease (AD) field. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 678 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
GRN mutations cause progranulin haploinsufficiency, which eventually leads to frontotemporal dementia (FTD-GRN). 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease is one of the most heritable diseases in elderly people and the most common type of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 926 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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
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 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.
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 →