28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Dementia has been increasingly more recognized to be a common feature in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), especially in old age. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The majority of community-dwelling older persons have brain pathology. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 80 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A mean value of 85.7% was achieved for overall diagnostic accuracy, 82.4% for positive predictive value, and 87.5% for negative predictive value. 2 key findings →
Participants: 94 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Loneliness is associated with an increased risk of late-life dementia but not with its leading causes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 76 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We have previously performed detailed clinical and neuropsychological assessments in a community-based cohort of patients with newly diagnosed parkinsonism, and through analysis of a subcohort with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD), we have demonstrated that cognitive dysfunction occurs even at the time of PD diagnosis and is heterogeneous. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 126 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Pulse pressure and pulse wave velocity, markers of arterial stiffness, have been associated with stroke, dementia, and lowered levels of cognitive function. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,749 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The aim of this international guideline on dementia was to present a peer-reviewed evidence-based statement for the guidance of practice for clinical neurologists, geriatricians, psychiatrists, and other specialist physicians responsible for the care of patients with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study is the first to show that, 10 years before the clinical diagnosis of dementia, subjects who later developed dementia performed worse in complex activities of daily living, which may constitute an early marker of the disease. 2 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 104 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The NINCDS-ADRDA and the DSM-IV-TR criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are the prevailing diagnostic standards in research; however, they have now fallen behind the unprecedented growth of scientific knowledge. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Distinguishing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) currently relies on a clinical history and examination, but positron emission tomography with [(18)F] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) shows different patterns of hypometabolism in these disorders that might aid differential diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia prevalence estimates from this first nationally representative population-based study of dementia in the USA to include subjects from all regions of the country can provide essential information for effective planning for the impending healthcare needs of the large and increasing number of individuals at risk for dementia as our population ages. 1 key finding →
Participants: 856 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hippocampal MRglc reductions using FDG-PET during normal aging predict cognitive decline years in advance of the clinical diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 55 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Molecular genetic studies of familial cases of FTLD-U have shown that mutations in the progranulin (PGRN) gene are a major genetic cause of FTLD-U. Thus, familial TDP-43 proteinopathy is associated with defects in multiple genes, and molecular genetics is required in these cases to correctly identify the causative gene defect. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The amnestic syndrome of the medial temporal type, defined by the Free and Cued Selective Recall Reminding Test, is able to distinguish patients at an early stage of Alzheimer disease from mild cognitive impairment non-converters. 2 key findings →
Participants: 251 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
For more than a decade, researchers have refined criteria for the diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and at the same time have recognized that cognitive impairment and dementia occur commonly in patients with Parkinson disease (PD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
To determine the frequency of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in patients presenting with progressive focal cortical syndromes, notably posterior cortical atrophy (PCA), corticobasal syndrome (CBS), behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) (or a mixed aphasia) and semantic dementia (SD); and to compare the age of onset, evolution and prognosis in patients with focal cortical presentations of AD versus more typical AD and those with non AD pathology. 1 key finding →
Participants: 200 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A preceding article described the clinical features of Parkinson's disease dementia (PD-D) and proposed clinical diagnostic criteria for "probable" and "possible" PD-D. The main focus of this article is to operationalize the diagnosis of PD-D and to propose practical guidelines based on a two level process depending upon the clinical scenario and the expertise of the evaluator involved in the assessment. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A number of in vivo neurochemistry and neuroimaging techniques, which can reliably assess aspects of physiology, pathology, chemistry, and neuroanatomy, hold promise as biomarkers. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The MoCA is a useful brief screening tool for the detection of mild dementia or MCI in subjects scoring over 25 points on the MMSE. 1 key finding →
Participants: 32 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We developed and tested the validity of a brief scale to assess everyday functioning in persons with serious mental illness. 3 key findings →
Participants: 434 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This report reviews the state of the literature and opportunities for research related to the cognitive correlates of functional status. 2 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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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 (3.6% 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 →