27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This Alzheimer's Association workgroup paper proposes a major update to how Alzheimer's disease is diagnosed: it defines the disease by biological markers (amyloid plaques and tau tangles detected via blood, CSF, or PET) rather than requiring clinical symptoms like memory loss to be present. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review article discusses the FDA's May 2025 clearance of Fujirebio's Lumipulse G blood test, the first FDA-cleared blood test for aiding Alzheimer's diagnosis (via the pTau217/beta-amyloid 1-42 ratio). 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This influential 2018 paper proposed defining Alzheimer's disease by what is happening biologically in the brain (amyloid plaques, tau tangles, and neuron loss, measured by scans or spinal fluid tests) instead of by memory symptoms alone. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) exists in both short and long forms. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia is a growing global health concern that significantly impacts the quality of life for millions of individuals and imposes substantial burdens on healthcare systems. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), the second common primary degenerative neurocognitive disorder after Alzheimer disease (AD), frequently presents concurrent co-pathologies that impact clinical presentation and progression. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There has been growing interest in the role of biofluid biomarkers to aid the diagnosis of dementia in older people. 1 key finding →
Participants: 46 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Community-based dementia screening using a questionnaire on risk factors, cognitive symptoms and the Mini-COG was feasible and acceptable in Brunei. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 178 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black participants had 2.883 times higher odds of developing dementia compared to Whites, while Hispanic participants had 1.230 times higher odds (not statistically significant). 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,495 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), a progressive neurodegenerative disease with heterogeneous clinical presentations, greatly impacts patients, caregivers, and society. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Internal consistency of the ACE-III was strong (McDonald's ω = 0.889). 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,265 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Lower cognitive levels in lonely and socially isolated patients suggest that these factors may contribute to dementia progression. 2 key findings →
Participants: 382 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The presence of cognitive lapses in the post-COVID-19 period, particularly among younger individuals, suggests a potential genetic predisposition. 2 key findings →
Participants: 162 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Significant amygdala atrophy was observed in multiple amygdala nuclei across cognitive performance groups, with more pronounced changes in the low-performance group. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 35 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 238 participants with informant data, 131 had dementia, 60 had CIND, and 47 had normal cognition. 5 key findings →
Participants: 240 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Clinical criteria for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease include insidious onset and progressive impairment of memory and other cognitive functions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The cognitive assessment protocol of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) was designed to evaluate the reliability and validity of cognitive assessment measures that might be valuable additions to the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS) or other concise batteries used in antidementia drug trials. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Two hundred and eighty-seven patients were tested: 135 controls (GDS 1-2), 70 with mild dementia (GDS 3-5) and 82 with more severe dementia (GDS 6-7). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Both Kraepelin [1919. Dementia Praecox and Paraphrenia, Livingston, Edinburgh.] and Bleuler [1911. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
is a heuristic that seeks to develop methodologies capable of identifying subtle behavior(s) that may flag emerging AD and other dementia related syndromes. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The results showed that Age, Education, and, occasionally, Biological sex were significant predictors. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, the combined features model achieved a higher discrimination accuracy than models with single feature sets alone. 5 key findings →
Participants: 128 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early detection of abnormal neurodegeneration amidst normal cognitive aging is crucial. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
RoCA classifies patients similarly to gold standard paper-based tests, with a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.81 (95% CI 0.67-0.91; P<.001). 5 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 35 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Twenty-six percent of eligible ED users contacted elected for study enrollment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 160 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 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 →