30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers may be useful to monitor the effects of novel disease-modifying anti-Aβ drugs in clinical trials. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 19 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our results suggest that diet may be a powerful environmental factor that modulates Alzheimer disease risk through its effects on central nervous system concentrations of Aβ42, lipoproteins, oxidative stress, and insulin. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 29 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this randomized clinical trial, BIIB080 reduced tau biomarkers, including CSF t-tau, CSF p-tau181, and tau PET, which is associated with cognitive decline, in participants with mild AD. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 13 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We were unable to detect a difference in HRQOL for screening for ADRD among older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,008 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings suggest that benzoate treatment may improve cognitive function in women with later-phase dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 97 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study demonstrated statistically significant differences between physostigmine and placebo on both a performance-based cognitive functioning instrument and a clinician's global evaluation. 5 key findings →
Participants: 366 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Assignment to active treatment was not beneficial for any of the indications examined and may have been slightly disadvantageous for patients with Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 39,875 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Baseline assessments were conducted on 128 participants. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 125 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 47 participants enrolled (mean age = 73.8 years; 43% female), 1 dropped out before treatment initiation and 6 before completion, including 2 in the nicotinamide and 4 in the placebo arm. 4 key findings →
Participants: 47 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher tau levels are associated with the fastest decline in everyday functioning in the presence of elevated amyloid, and those accumulating more tau show a faster decline in everyday functioning. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 434 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 135 older adults (mean age = 69.3 years; women = 61.5%), no associations were found within AD-signature regions (all p > 0.25). 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Treatment of dementia with cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine can result in statistically significant but clinically marginal improvement in measures of cognition and global assessment of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Alzheimer's disease (AD) results in progressively worsening cognitive decline, leading to loss of functional ability, behavior/mood disturbances, institutionalization, and death. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The evidence to support a specific time frame for discontinuation of Alzheimer's disease treatment is limited. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Currently, five pharmacotherapeutic options are available to treat Alzheimer's disease: memantine; the three cholinesterase inhibitors donepezil, galantamine, and rivastigmine; and combination treatments with memantine and one cholinesterase inhibitor. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Currently available data indicate superior therapeutic effects of combination treatment for Alzheimer dementia with memantine and acetylcholine esterase inhibitors in certain clinical contexts. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The average age in our 2 groups was 81.1 years, and 61.4% of our population was female. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 300 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Estrogen replacement therapy for 1 year did not slow disease progression nor did it improve global, cognitive, or functional outcomes in women with mild to moderate AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The techniques evaluated were person-centered showering and the towel bath (a person-centered, in-bed bag-bath with no-rinse soap). 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This review has shown that wearable systems are used mostly for the monitoring and provision of feedback on posture and upper extremity movements in stroke rehabilitation. 4 key findings →
Participants: 21 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Summary results for patients with mild AD were obtained by contrasting the summary results for patients with mild or moderate AD with the summary results for the subset of patients with moderate AD. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 431 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The NTB had high test-retest reliability at 6 (Pearson product moment correlation [r] = 0.92) and 12 (r = 0.88) months. 3 key findings →
Participants: 300 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
There was a significant interaction (P = 0.024) between B vitamin treatment and plasma combined ω-3 fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid) on brain atrophy rates. 5 key findings →
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ten weeks of treatment with PF-04494700 was safe and well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease, indicating the feasibility of a larger long-term efficacy trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 28 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study examined the efficacy and safety of memantine monotherapy in patients with moderate-to-severe Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 350 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 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.
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 →