The genetic basis of Lewy body dementia (LBD) is not well understood. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The chromosome 9p21 amyotrophic lateral sclerosis-frontotemporal dementia (ALS-FTD) locus contains one of the last major unidentified autosomal-dominant genes underlying these common neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While sex differences were not apparent at asymptomatic stages, females showed more rapid declines across all outcomes in symptomatic stages compared to males. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 337 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
63/100
Common variants within TMEM106B are associated with risk for frontotemporal lobar degeneration with TDP-43 pathology (FTLD-TDP). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 518 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The criteria ought to provide the foundation for research work into the neuropsychology, neuropathology, genetics, molecular biology, and epidemiology of these important clinical disorders that account for a substantial proportion of cases of primary degenerative dementia occurring before the age of 65 years. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
For neuropsychology measures, we noted the earliest significant differences between mutation carriers and non-carriers 5 years before expected onset, when differences were significant for all measures except for tests of immediate recall and verbal fluency. 2 key findings →
Participants: 220 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There was strong agreement regarding the definition of the core clinico-radiological syndrome, meaning that the current consensus statement should be regarded as a refinement, development, and extension of previous single-center PCA criteria rather than any wholesale alteration or redescription of the syndrome. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Reversible phase separation underpins the role of FUS in ribonucleoprotein granules and other membrane-free organelles and is, in part, driven by the intrinsically disordered low-complexity (LC) domain of FUS. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MATR3 is an RNA- and DNA-binding protein that interacts with TDP-43, a disease protein linked to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Symptomatic females with genetic FTD had lower frontal cortical thickness than males, and the C9orf72 subgroup showed lower-than-expected frontal cortical thickness for a given level of executive functioning. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 394 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We used an untargeted mass spectrometric approach, tandem mass tag proteomics, for the identification of proteomic signatures in genetic frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 238 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
However, LB pathology in LRRK2-related PD may be a marker for a broader parkinsonian symptom complex including cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
In the Rush dataset, we included 1,277 women and 579 men. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,277 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Females with sporadic bvFTD showed worse compulsive behavior (p = 0.026) and language impairments (p = 0.024) compared to females with genetic bvFTD (n = 152). 5 key findings →
Participants: 152 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are progressive adult-onset neurodegenerative diseases with overlapping pathological and genetic origins. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Symptomatic GRN carriers showed elevated WMHs, primarily in the frontal lobe, while no significant increase was observed in symptomatic C9orf72 or MAPT carriers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 763 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early isolated functional disruptions in salience/visual networks were present in asymptomatic carriers, along with anterior cingulate gray matter reductions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accurate diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) with right anterior temporal lobe (RATL) predominance remains challenging due to lack of clinical characterization, and standardized terminology. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
- Randomized / 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
- Multicenter 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 32,180 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 32,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66.5% of the library) and OpenAlex (15.8%), 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.
1,045 records (3.2% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events
Last updated