See Vandenberghe and Schaeverbeke (doi:10.1093/awx065) for a scientific commentary on this article. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The regional relationships between tau positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease (AD) remain uncertain. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 71 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The diagnostic performance of salivary Lf in the cohort 1 had an area under the curve [AUC] of 0•95 (0•911-0•992) for the differentiation of the prodromal AD/AD group positive for amyloid-PET (PET + ) versus healthy group, and 0•97 (0•924-1) versus the frontotemporal dementia (FTD) group. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
52/100
Microstructural integrity of both white matter lesions and normal-appearing white matter is associated with cognitive function, regardless of white matter atrophy and white matter lesion volume. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 860 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Amnestic forms of MCI appear to have demographic, genetic, and MRI findings suggestive of Alzheimer disease pathology, whereas the nonamnestic forms of MCI have findings suggestive of vascular disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 153 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 822 individuals enrolled in the HEAD study, 681 participants spanning cognitively unimpaired to dementia were included. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 681 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
18 F-SMBT-1 yielded high-contrast images at steady state (60-80 min after injection). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The PET Core has demonstrated a variety of methods for the standardization of biomarkers such as florbetapir PET in a multicenter setting. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Participants in the hypertension group with at least 1 ε4 allele showed significantly greater amyloid burden than those with only 1 risk factor or no risk factors. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The TIV normalization of cross-sectional brain volumes significantly reduced interindividual variation; the coefficient of variation (CV) was reduced from 10.0% to 6.0% in controls (P <.001). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
50/100
Posterior cortical atrophy (PCA), usually an atypical clinical syndrome of Alzheimer's disease, has well-characterized patterns of cortical atrophy and tau deposition that are distinct from typical amnestic presentations of Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this cross-sectional study, we found an association between Aβ brain burden measured in vivo and DBP and cortisol, indicating a possible link between these CVRF and Aβ burden measured by PiB-PET. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In middle-aged community participants, we observed a significant inverse association of anthropometric and CT-based measurements of abdominal, especially visceral, fat with total brain volume. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Future longitudinal studies examining the association of more severe depressive symptoms and cerebral tau accumulation are needed to substantiate this finding and to guide prevention and treatment in AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In-vivo labeling of retinal amyloid-beta(Aβ) and tau has potential as non-invasive biomarker for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There were significant associations (p < 0.05) between the NPI variables (total score, Affective factor) and entorhinal and precuneus tau across all participants. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previous work indicates that resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is sensitive to functional brain changes related to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology across the clinical spectrum. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
Based on these preliminary cross-sectional findings, striatal PiB-PET measurements may offer particular value in the detection and tracking of preclinical ADAD, informing a mutation carrier's prognosis and evaluating amyloid-β-modifying ADAD treatments. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Evidence for association between subjective cognition and brain amyloid-β deposition in healthy older adults is demonstrable but measure-specific. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Appetite disturbances were present in 9.4% of participants and were associated with greater neuropsychiatric burden and disease severity. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 7,223 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Cognitively normal persons with brain injury biomarker abnormalities, with or without abnormal levels of β-amyloid, were indistinguishable on a variety of imaging markers, clinical features, and risk factors. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Imaging studies of anatomic changes in regional gray matter volumes and cortical thickness have documented age effects in many brain regions, but the majority of such studies have been cross-sectional investigations of individuals studied at a single point in time. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
46/100
Alzheimer's disease is associated with pre-symptomatic changes in brain morphometry and accumulation of abnormal tau and amyloid-beta pathology. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found no significant changes in substantia nigra or cortex flortaucipir uptake in Parkinson's disease patients over two years and no association with changes in cognitive symptoms. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Atrophy of the CC differentiates HE and ID from AD subjects and tracks the cognitive decline of this disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Where “Free full text” comes from
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
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
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.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
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 30,180 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.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →