27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The literature has several methodological limitations including lack of sufficient algorithm development descriptions and standard definitions. 1 key finding →
Participants: 255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Therefore, we conducted a longitudinal study to examine whether PM2.5 affects the episodic memory decline, and also explored the potential mediating role of increased neuroanatomic risk of Alzheimer's disease associated with exposure. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 998 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Targeted clinical application of specific technologies is poised to revolutionize precision care in dementia as these technologies may be used both by patients and caregivers, and at a systems level to provide safe and effective care. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,337 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The heterogeneity of neurodegenerative diseases is a key confound to disease understanding and treatment development, as study cohorts typically include multiple phenotypes on distinct disease trajectories. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We developed machine learning prediction models for post-operative delirium that performed better than chance and are comparable with traditional stepwise logistic regression. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 134 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Strikingly gene-expression, network-based analysis and cell type deconvolution approaches revealed a consistent immune signature in the brain and blood of female AD patients that was absent in males. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The testing conditions and the accessibility of telemedicine yield inconclusive results as to whether telemedicine can improve the management of dementia in geriatric individuals. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The data from this study provide strong preliminary evidence that, in patients newly admitted to post-acute care facilities from acute care hospitals, delirium symptoms are prevalent, persistent, and associated with poor functional recovery. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 551 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
DCR outperforms the MMSE in detecting and classifying cognitive impairment-in a fraction of the time-while being not influenced by a patient's ethnicity. 5 key findings →
Participants: 360 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between 2011 and 2014, seniors experiencing health decline used various digital health technologies at low absolute rates (range: 1%-20%). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 4,037 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These results suggest that bvFTD may be characterized by an allostatic-interoceptive overload manifested in ongoing electrophysiological markers, brain atrophy, functional networks, and cognition. 4 key findings →
Participants: 94 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Portable, low-field magnetic resonance imaging (LF-MRI) of the brain may facilitate point-of-care assessment of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in settings where conventional MRI cannot. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early detection of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is critical yet challenging, particularly in younger individuals. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 120 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the field of neurodegeneration, speech and language assessments are useful for diagnosing aphasic syndromes and for characterizing other disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence of dementia in Latin America and the Caribbean is growing rapidly, increasing the burden placed on caregivers. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The clinical prediction model can play a beneficial role in decision-making for preventative measures for patients at risk of developing a delirium. 3 key findings →
Participants: 207 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In Alzheimer's disease (AD), pathological tau protein shows a progressive accumulation of post-translational modifications (PTMs), reflecting disease severity, progression, and prion-like activity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum, the prodromal state of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) precedes AD dementia and identifying MCI individuals at risk of progression is important for clinical management. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study of Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common cause of dementia, faces challenges in terms of understanding the cause, monitoring the pathogenesis, and developing early diagnoses and effective treatments. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results demonstrate that the repeatability of speech features extracted using open-source tool kits is low. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Clinical trials focusing on therapeutic candidates that modify β-amyloid (Aβ) have repeatedly failed to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD), suggesting that Aβ may not be the optimal target for treating AD. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
New personalized endpoints that are clinically meaningful to individuals and their families should be developed. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study describes the philosophy of expert practice and outlines a set of best practice principles when working with people with PPA.Implications for rehabilitationPrimary progressive aphasia (PPA) describes a group of language led dementias which deteriorate inexorably over time. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This article presents a three-factor anatomical model of human idea generation and creative drive, focusing on interactions between the temporal lobes, frontal lobes, and limbic system. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Digital phenotyping based on physiological parameters and sensing technology may increase pain assessment objectivity in older adults with dementia. 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →