This study failed to find a beneficial effect of exogenous melatonin, consistent with a number of other studies. 2 key findings →
Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Regular, long-term, customized HE improved the executive function of community-dwelling older people with memory disorders, but the effects were mild and were not observed in other domains of cognition. 3 key findings →
Participants: 210 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Blood pressure variability (BPV) has been shown to have predictive value over blood pressure (BP) levels alone in stroke patients. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 460 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
67/100
Additionally, our results indicate that AD subjects carrying APOE ε4 are more responsive to the neuroprotective effects of physical activity. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Further investigations are needed, especially trials providing stronger interventions (such as exercise training and a controlled diet) and also embracing the sensorial domain of IC. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,445 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Transcranial pulse stimulation (TPS) is a recent development in non-invasive brain stimulations (NIBS) that has been proven to be effective in terms of significantly improving Alzheimer patients' cognition, memory, and execution functions. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The objective of our study was to assess the efficacy and safety of donepezil in young adults with Down syndrome (DS) but no evidence of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 123 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Classification of evidence This study provides Class I evidence that for women with AD, raloxifene does not have a significant cognitive effect. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 486 older adults who provided consent, 375 (with rMDD, MCI, or both) received at least 1 intervention session (mean [SD] age, 72.2 [6.4] years; 232 women [62%] and 143 men [38%]). 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Simvastatin-related reductions in CSF p-tau 181 concentrations may be modulated by LDL cholesterol. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The cognitive and behavioral effects and the safety of oxiracetam therapy during a placebo-controlled trial and the relevant follow-up up to 1 year in patients with senile dementia of Alzheimer type (SDAT) and multi-infarct dementia (MID) of mild to moderate degree were studied. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Innovations associated with the bayesian approach can improve the efficiency of drug development and the accuracy of clinical trials, even in the context of substantial data missingness. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 854 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We sent invitations to 91,433 households; 5542 (6.1%) responded, 2120 completed the Baseline Survey (78.5% online; 21.5% via computer-assisted telephone interview), and 2087 were deemed eligible, yielding a response rate of 2.3%. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 374 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this multicenter randomized clinical trial among older adults with family history of dementia and/or self-reported subjective cognitive decline, exercise, IRVR, or both did not result in statistically significant differences in improvements in cognitive function over 24 months. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,290 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
67/100
Patients with AD continue to show detectable disease progression over time, but treatment with donepezil for 1 year was associated with a 38% reduction in the risk of functional decline compared with placebo. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
67/100
Racial/ethnic groups differed in sources of recruitment, reasons for screen failure, and overall probability of eligibility in a preclinical AD trial. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,945 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Aβ plaques removal in the brain due to amyloid therapy is strongly correlated with a better clinical response in patients with early Alzheimer's disease and a higher ARIA-E rate for the treatment groups and clinical trials in this meta-analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In patients with moderate or severe Alzheimer's disease, continued treatment with donepezil was associated with cognitive benefits that exceeded the minimum clinically important difference and with significant functional benefits over the course of 12 months. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Because of flawed methods and small clinical benefits, the scientific basis for recommendations of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease is questionable. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease is a neurological disorder that results in cognitive and behavioral impairment. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Collaborative care for the treatment of Alzheimer disease resulted in significant improvement in the quality of care and in behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia among primary care patients and their caregivers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) commonly exhibit psychosis and behavioral disturbances that impair patient functioning, create caregiver distress, and lead to institutionalization. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Published studies suggest that greater adherence to Mediterranean diet is associated with slower cognitive decline and lower risk of developing Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Atorvastatin treatment may be of some clinical benefit and could be established as an effective therapy for Alzheimer disease if the current findings are substantiated by a much larger multicenter trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 98 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The findings support the clinical efficacy of CR in early-stage AD. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
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 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 →