27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
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
A clinical tool can be used to predict 30-day mortality in patients hospitalized with lower gastrointestinal bleeding. 2 key findings →
Participants: 4,044 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The machine learning model developed in this study demonstrated strong classification performance in detecting and differentiating depression, anxiety, and apathy. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This multimodal approach enhanced the system's performance and provided a clinically informative method for neuroimaging analysis. 1 key finding →
Participants: 44 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 6378 papers published between 2014 and 2023 were analyzed. 5 key findings →
Participants: 6,378 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Random forest classifier and feature selection procedures were used to select digital biomarkers. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,324 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
11 variables were critical in the training phase, including educational level, depression, insomnia, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), medication count, gender, stenting, systolic blood pressure (sbp), neurosis and rapid eye movement. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,379 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accurate processing of emotional information is a critical component of appropriate social interactions and interpersonal relationships. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Medicare beneficiaries with ADRD were at a higher risk of PAHs for certain uncontrolled comorbidities and incurred higher Medicare expenditures compared with matched controls without dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A history of previous exposure to surgery under GA might be associated with an increased risk of dementia, particularly in subjects who have undergone repeated exposure to GA. 2 key findings →
Participants: 21,380 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Having an exam reflects multiple factors. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Utilization patterns of psychotropic drugs in institutionalized patients with dementia have changed over the past decade. 4 key findings →
Participants: 49,251 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These preliminary findings suggest that derived digital biomarkers may identify cognitive impairment in preclinical and prodromal AD, and may predict disease progression. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
After taking into consideration a possible protopathic bias in the 2 years preceding the AD diagnosis date, benzodiazepine use was not associated with an increased risk of developing AD. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The authors found a relatively high incidence of hallucinations and delusions in patients diagnosed with probable AD and suggest that specific neurologic signs, cognitive abilities, and accelerated decline may be predictive markers for their occurrence. 5 key findings →
Participants: 329 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pfordresher, Mario Liotti and Steven Brown Journal of Parkinson's Disease5:3 (517-524)Quantitative Analysis of Voice in Parkinson Disease Compared to Motor Performance: A Pilot StudyAlice K. Goberman Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research53:4 (836-849)1 Aug 2010Intonation Contrast in Cantonese Speakers With Hypokinetic Dysarthria Associated With Parkinson's DiseaseJoan K.-Y. M. and William in Geriatric Dec of Speech and Voice Associated with Parkinson's Olson Ramig Clinical Linguistics & Jan speech in Parkinson's disease: A M. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurodegenerative tauopathies, of which progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) is one of the most common, are clinically heterogeneous, reflecting differences in distribution and biochemical composition of tau pathology. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Using a targeted proteomic screen, we identified novel candidate biomarkers that complement the best current CSF biomarkers for distinguishing very mildly/mildly demented from cognitively normal individuals. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Speech and language assessment in 30 patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type and in 70 normal controls revealed that all Alzheimer patients were aphasic. 1 key finding →
Participants: 30 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Machine learning does not differentiate clinically relevant disease categories yet. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Quantifying gait and postural control adds valuable information that aids in understanding neurological conditions where motor symptoms predominate and cause considerable functional impairment. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Digital technology is transforming the development of drugs for Alzheimer's disease and was the topic of the Alzheimer's Association's Research Roundtable on its May 23-24, 2017 meeting. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) can be classified based on the relative density of neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in the hippocampus and association cortices into three subtypes: typical AD, hippocampal-sparing AD (HpSp AD), and limbic-predominant AD (LP AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Language decline is usually the fastest and predominant change in primary progressive aphasia (PPA). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 →