32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
All drugs improved the cognitive function, with the effect value ranging from -1.23 (95% CI -2.17 to -0.30) for 20 mg memantine to -3.29 (95% CI -4.14 to -2.45) for 32 mg galantamine. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) affects millions of people worldwide. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
At 6 months, compared with usual care, participants receiving the intervention had better QOL (QOL-AD score, 0.09 [95% CI, -0.63 to 0.82] vs -0.88 [95% CI, -1.62 to -0.13]; treatment effect estimate, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.07-1.86; P = .03). 4 key findings →
Participants: 612 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this 3-year randomized clinical trial, ω-3 treatment was safe and well-tolerated but failed to reach significant reductions in WML accumulation or neuronal integrity breakdown among all participants, which may be attributable to sample size limitations. 5 key findings →
Participants: 102 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease, a progressive neurodegenerative pathology, is characterized by the accumulation of Amyloid-β plaques in the brain. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Anti-amyloid drugs for early Alzheimer's disease, including lecanemab, are associated with adverse events (AEs), such as amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA)-edema/effusion (E), ARIA-hemorrhage, and infusion-related reactions, which can indicate allocated arms in clinical trials. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
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
The enrolled population of 84 subjects (31 homozygotes and 53 heterozygotes) was 52% females, mean age 69 years, MMSE 25.7 [70% mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 30% mild AD] with 55% on cholinesterase inhibitors. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 80 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age was the strongest risk factor for progression. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
APOE -ε4 allele[s] is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA) in anti-amyloid beta therapy, and is also associated with cerebrovascular risk factors such as hyperlipidemia or atherosclerosis. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,313 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There were no statistical differences between the placebo or solanezumab groups in CDR-G, CDR-SB, specific CDR boxes or CDR composite scores over the course of the trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 583 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nonlinear dose-response relationship between exercise and cognitive improvement in Alzheimer's disease, with the optimal AE dose identified at 660 METs-min/week for enhancing cognitive function in AD. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,242 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings illuminate the potential benefits of ChEI treatment in DLB patients. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,095 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our pilot studies (National Institutes of Health [NIH] stage 1A) have shown that MHB is feasible, acceptable, and associated with improvement in lifestyle behavior and cognitive outcomes. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 225 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although current prevention and treatment approaches to dementia have been less than optimally successful, substantial investments in dementia research will undoubtedly provide new answers to reducing the burden of dementia worldwide. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Highlights Brexpiprazole treatment for 10 weeks improved agitation in Alzheimer's dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The use of conventional anti-dementia drugs is associated with a lower mortality in nursing home residents with dementia and should be widely used in this population. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 25,358 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 4413 individuals (mean [SD] age, 71.27 [4.66] years, 2617 women [59.3%]), mean Aβ-PET was elevated in individuals with history of memory impairment in both parents (n = 455; mean [SD] standardized uptake value ratio [SUVR] = 1.12 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5) and in those with only maternal history (n = 1772; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.10 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 2.70 × 10-5) compared with those with only paternal history (n = 632; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.08 [0.18]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5) or no family history (n = 1554; mean [SD] SUVR = 1.08 [0.19]; Wilcoxon P = 1.1 × 10-5). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 455 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Choline alfoscerate exhibits additional cognitive improvement in both cognitive and noncognitive domains, supporting the findings of the ASCOMALVA trial. 2 key findings →
Participants: 119 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Progressive cerebral volume loss on MRI is a hallmark of Alzheimer's disease and has been widely used as an outcome measure in clinical trials, with the prediction that disease-modifying treatments would slow loss. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognition-oriented treatments (COTs) are a group of non-pharmacological treatments aimed at maintaining or improving cognitive functioning. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic-review Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
However, the effect sizes were small. 1 key finding →
Participants: 34 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results demonstrate that 1-h daily treatment with Cognito's Evoked Gamma Therapy System (CogTx-001) was safe and well-tolerated and demonstrated potential clinical benefits in mild to moderate AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 76 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Phase 3 (NIH stage 1B) is a feasibility randomized controlled trial of the intervention versus the Health Education Program control. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 28 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 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.
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