27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The presence of an APOE-epsilon4 allele is a determinant of AD risk in whites, but African Americans and Hispanics have an increased frequency of AD regardless of their APOE genotype. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,079 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE genotype is an important determinant of the risk of dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 134 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Using parametric methods, no evidence for linkage to the region spanned by the chromosome 12 markers could be detected if familial AD is assumed to arise from the same genetic locus in all 53 families. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 173 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Alpha-2-macroglobulin (alpha-2M; encoded by the gene A2M) is a serum pan-protease inhibitor that has been implicated in Alzheimer disease (AD) based on its ability to mediate the clearance and degradation of A beta, the major component of beta-amyloid deposits. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) have been implicated in the chronic complications of diabetes mellitus and have been reported to play an important role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
HIV produces a chronic viral infection of the central nervous system that elicits chronic glial activation and overexpression of glial cytokines that are also implicated in Alzheimer disease (AD) pathogenesis. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Microglial cells are considered to play an important role in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Two major risk factors for late-onset familial and sporadic Alzheimer disease (AD), a leading cause of dementia worldwide, are increasing age and inheritance of the epsilon4 allele of the apolipoprotein E gene (APOE4). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Senile dementia with tangles is a sporadic subset of very late onset dementia with preponderance in females over age 80 years. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The epsilon 4 allele of the apolipoprotein E (apoE) is associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and also with elevated serum total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein levels. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We completed a systematic survey of the human genome, conducted at an average resolution of 10 cM, for the identification of simple sequence tandem repeat polymorphisms (SSTRPs) that target new risk genes for Alzheimer disease (AD) by virtue of linkage disequilibrium. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Apolipoprotein E, alpha2-macroglobulin, and amyloid precursor protein (APP) are involved in the development of Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →