28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
AUC for amyloid and tau PET provide expert recommendations for clinical use of these technologies in the evolving landscape of diagnostics and therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic-review Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The panel cautions users of this guideline that there is significant variability in diagnostic test accuracy and many commercially available BBM tests do not meet these thresholds, especially using a single cutoff. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic-review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with the usual care clinics (12-month incidence, 213 of 1724 [12.4%]), the odds of an incident ADRD diagnosis were higher in the clinics randomized to QDRS plus PDM (12-month incidence, 355 of 2301 [15.4%]; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.05-1.64) but not the clinics randomized to PDM only (12-month incidence, 134 of 1300 [10.3%]; AOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63-1.11]). 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 5,325 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Rising global concentrations of environmental microplastics and nanoplastics (MNPs) drive concerns for human exposure and health outcomes. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings revealed distinct patterns of connectivity linked to normal ageing or Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 209 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) α-synuclein (α-syn) seed amplification assays (SAAs) can detect Lewy body pathology (LBP) with high accuracy but are invasive and costly. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,567 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 3828 titles and abstracts and 434 full-text articles were reviewed, yielding 12 articles meeting eligibility criteria. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 694 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
< 0.001] total scores differed significantly between groups, with controls (median MoCA 28.5, 95% CI 28.0-29.0; median MMSE 30, 95% CI 30.0-30.0) outperforming prodromal (median MoCA 26, 95% CI 23.0-27.0; median MMSE 29, 95% CI 27.5-29.5) and symptomatic (median MoCA 20.5, 95% CI 17.0-24.0; median MMSE 26, 95% CI 23.5-29.0) carriers. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 9,361 randomized participants, 7,221 (77%) were eligible to be re-contacted. 5 key findings →
Participants: 248 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The 2,641 participants had a mean (SD) age of 74 (2.8) years at baseline; 53 % were female, 36 % were of Black race, and had a range of baseline CKM: 3 % Stage 0 (no CKM), 4 % Stage 1 (excess/dysfunctional adiposity), 26 % Stage 2 (metabolic risk factors), 24 % Stage 3 (subclinical CVD and CKD), and 43 % Stage 4 (clinical CVD and CKD). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,075 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher structural stiffness of the carotid artery is associated with cognitive decline, whereas both structural and load‐dependent stiffness are associated with brain structural abnormalities common in Alzheimer disease‐related dementias. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,489 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 298 participants (MCI, n = 56; NC, n = 242; mean age 75.1 years; 45.6% female), the groups were similar in age, sex, race, and APOE ε4 status at baseline, as well as in most driving behaviors. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 298 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fit of the models to the data was adequate for general cognitive performance (root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.03; comparative fit index (CFI)=0.94; standardised root mean residual (SRMR)=0.05), language (RMSEA=0.02; CFI=0.95; SRMR=0.05) and good for memory (RMSEA=0.05; CFI=0.99; SRMR=0.02) and executive functioning (RMSEA=0.03; CFI=0.98; SRMR=0.03). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,878 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed high levels of missing data in most cognitive test items - on average 13% and as high as 65%. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 9,755 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In total, 41 participants consented (n=10, 24% participants with Alzheimer disease; n=11, 27% participants with Lewy body disease; and n=20, 49% controls). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 41 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Inter-rater agreement for ID level classification was 95% within sites but 60% between sites. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 673 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During follow-up ranging from 1.0 to 22.9 years, 75 patients (29.88%) converted to AD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 75 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This is because of the ambiguity surrounding the terminology used to characterize reversible dementia—the variation in the population being studied, or the existence of subclinical instances that are difficult to diagnose.[3] By and large however, the proportion of reversible dementias compared to the irreversible dementias is very low. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A multivariate analysis was also performed to predict specific risk factors associated with male and female EOAD and LOAD patients. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,212 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The rural setting presented unique challenges including: low literacy rates (60.1% of participants had no schooling), diverse language use (primarily Giriama and Swahili), limited infrastructure (e.g., 44.8% of households had electricity), restrictive cultural norms that influenced data collection (e.g., in-home interviews were often conducted outdoors with destructions). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 202 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Up-to-date, strictly cross-nationally comparable and nationally representative data on cognitive health are essential for our understanding of the dementia-related challenges in healthcare, to detect shortcomings in healthcare systems and to design effective prevention strategies. 1 key finding →
Participants: 47,773 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Forty-three proteins were differentially regulated in FTD compared to controls and AD, reflecting axon development, regulation of synapse assembly, and cell-cell adhesion mediator activity pathways. 5 key findings →
Participants: 189 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive status was determined for 5414 participants, with a dementia prevalence of 8.9% when assessed at a mean age of 81 years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,414 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 65 participants (mean age = 79.4 years; women = 54%), 34% had dementia and 32% had CIND. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 65 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 6879 persons (mean 56.1 years, standard deviation 6.2). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,879 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 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.
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 →