Treatment with donanemab resulted in rapid reduction of amyloid, even after a single dose. 5 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Seventy-one studies were included for review, representing a total of 6757 patients (2350 AD, 793 MCI, 2902 healthy controls (HC), and 841 others with a range of other neurodegenerative diagnoses). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 6,757 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Fourteen studies assessing OCT-A in preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD), mild cognitive impairment, or AD were included. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is characterized by the spread of tau pathology throughout the cerebral cortex. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,612 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found that the cognitively unimpaired amyloid-β-negative individuals had significant longitudinal tau accumulation confined to the PET Braak-like stage I (3.9%) and II (2.8%) areas. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 125 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher CSF NfL was associated with decreasing microstructural integrity and WMH. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 536 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We tested whether dysregulation of cholesterol catabolism, through its conversion to primary bile acids (BAs), was associated with dementia pathogenesis. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 141 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
In this longitudinal study of cognitively unimpaired adults, living in the most highly disadvantaged neighborhoods was associated with accelerated degeneration in Alzheimer signature regions and cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 19 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 303 participants (mean [SD] age, 73.16 [5.19] years, 181 [60%] women, 96 [32%] non-Hispanic White, 113 [37%] Non-Hispanic Black, 94 [31%] Hispanic), baseline WMH volumes were associated with cortical thinning in medial temporal and frontal/parietal regions. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 303 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mechanisms through which tau and amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulate in the brain of Alzheimer's disease patients may differ but both are related to neuronal networks. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 58 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Voxel-wise analysis showed higher meningeal off-target binding in women compared to men across all three tracers. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 165 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Across different tau biomarker groups, the proportion of participants with a discordant profile varied (plasma+/CSF- 15.6%, plasma-/CSF+ 15.3%, plasma+/PET- 22.4%, and plasma-/PET+ 6.1%). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Relief algorithm identified the caudate, cingulate, and precuneus as the strongest predictors among all modalities. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
60/100
The FBB threshold based on the young sample (1.08; 18 CL) was consistent with that of the data-driven approach (1.10; 21 CL), and the existing FBP threshold converted to CL with the derived transformation (1.11; 20 CL). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 62 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A biological research framework to define Alzheimer' disease with dichotomized biomarker measurement was proposed by National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association (NIA-AA). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
A total of 124 eyes of 69 participants with PD (39 men [56.5%]; mean [SD] age, 71.7 [7.0] years) and 248 eyes of 137 control participants (77 men [56.2%]; mean [SD] age, 70.9 [6.7] years) were analyzed. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 69 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ChT was increased in people with DS (pwDS) compared to Ctrl. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 24 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Three women (aged 61, 72, and 73 years) consecutively enrolled in the trial successfully completed repeated focused ultrasound-induced BBB opening of the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
The current data provide strong support for continued investigations that examine the risk factors for and biomarkers of AD among diverse populations. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,705 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results showed HP was functionally divided into HPhead , HPbody , and HPtail bilaterally along the longitudinal axis. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MRI studies have provided valuable insights into the structure and function of neural networks, particularly in health and in classical neurodegenerative conditions such as Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
DCTclock discriminates between diagnostic groups and improves upon traditional cognitive tests for detecting biomarkers of amyloid and tau pathology in CN older adults. 3 key findings →
Participants: 300 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
18 F-MK-6240 recapitulated Braak staging and correlated with CSF tau and p-tau, normalized to Aβ42 . 18 F-MK-6240 negatively correlated with age across Braak regions in amyloid-positive participants, consistent with greater tau pathology in earlier onset AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 101 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In both cohorts, we observed that tau-PET standardized uptake value ratio in medial temporal lobes was associated with clinical dementia rating Sum of Boxes (CDR-SoB) scores independently of local amyloid-PET uptake (FWE corrected at p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
Participants: 154 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
52/100
Cognitive resilience is an important modulating factor of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease, but the functional brain mechanisms that support cognitive resilience remain elusive. 4 key findings →
Participants: 108 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 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.
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 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 →