28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Following reports of meningoencephalitis (overall 18/300 [6%]), immunization was stopped after one (2 patients), two (274 patients), or three (24 patients) injections. 3 key findings →
Participants: 300 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Galantamine failed to significantly influence conversion to dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 2,048 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Resveratrol was safe and well-tolerated. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 119 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings reveal the potential for anti-Aβ therapies to compromise long-term brain health by accelerating brain atrophy and provide new insight into the adverse impact of ARIA. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 8,062 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There was no evidence that aspirin was effective in reducing risk of dementia, MCI, or cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Participants: 19,114 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older adults with higher triglyceride levels within the normal to high-normal range had a lower dementia risk and slower cognitive decline over time compared with individuals with lower triglyceride levels. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 13,976 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The efficacy and safety of donepezil as a treatment for patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) was investigated in a multicenter, double-blind study. 4 key findings →
Participants: 162 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Donepezil has significant efficacy in the treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients with mild to moderate AD. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 134 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Two hundred eighty-eight patients had paired scans (mean interval 10.9 months). 2 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In this large-scale randomized controlled trial evaluating statin therapy as a treatment for mild to moderate Alzheimer disease, atorvastatin was not associated with significant clinical benefit over 72 weeks. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 640 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
PDE5I initiation in men with ED was associated with a lower risk of AD, particularly in those most frequently issued prescriptions. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 269,725 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Simvastatin had no benefit on the progression of symptoms in individuals with mild to moderate AD despite significant lowering of cholesterol. 4 key findings →
Participants: 406 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No significant differences were found in the primary efficacy analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 234 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although significant treatment effects were not seen in the primary efficacy measures, outcomes on secondary measures suggest promising directions for further evaluation of donepezil treatment in patients with MCI. 2 key findings →
Participants: 133 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Although prespecified criteria for testing treatment effects were not met, these data suggest a potential treatment effect in patients with mild AD treated with high-dose crenezumab. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 184 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In cognitively intact individuals at risk, sustained treatment with naproxen sodium 220 mg twice daily increases frequency of adverse health effects but does not reduce apparent progression of presymptomatic AD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 195 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on the results of the prespecified coprimary endpoints, this study was negative. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 624 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At 6 months, galantamine significantly improved cognition and global function. 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 636 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients' mean age was 73.6 years (range 48 to 92 years). 2 key findings →
Participants: 144 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A long-term CMI in ChEI-treated early Alzheimer disease patients produced additional mood and cognitive benefits. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Greater access to effective programs of counseling and support could yield considerable benefits for caregivers, patients with Alzheimer disease, and society. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled studies at lower risk of bias comparing ChEI treatment with placebo or usual treatment, for 6 months or longer, in patients with dementia of any type. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 79,153 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study showed that subcutaneous etanercept (50 mg/wk) was well tolerated in this small group of patients with Alzheimer disease dementia, but a larger more heterogeneous group needs to be tested before recommending its use for broader groups of patients. 4 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients with severe AD demonstrated greater efficacy compared to placebo on measures of cognition and global function. 3 key findings →
Participants: 176 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These results do not support the hypothesis that celecoxib or naproxen prevent Alzheimer dementia, at least within the early years after initiation of treatment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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.
1,034 records (3.6% 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 →