The Boston v2.0 criteria have low accuracy in patients with AD dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 63 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Microglial activation is a distinguished attribute in many neurodegenerative diseases of aging. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The amyloid cascade hypothesis, according to which the self-assembly of amyloid-β peptide (Aβ) is a causative process in Alzheimer's disease, has driven many therapeutic efforts for the past 20 years. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In the process of drug development, in vitro studies do not always adequately predict human-specific drug responsiveness in clinical trials. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The amyloid hypothesis has long been the central dogma in drug discovery for Alzheimer's disease (AD), leading to many small-molecule and biological drug candidates. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The termination of many clinical trials of amyloid-targeting therapies for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has had a major impact on the AD clinical research enterprise. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) in magnetic resonance imaging scans have emerged as indicators of potentially serious side effects in clinical trials of therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Excitatory glutamatergic neurotransmission via N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) is critical for synaptic plasticity and survival of neurons. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, there is also some limitation associated with IN like poor drug permeation through the nasal mucosa and mucociliary clearance. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
An increasing number of patients come to experienced DBS centers after unsatisfactory results from DBS surgery. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The foundation of current Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatment involves pharmacological and nonpharmacological management and care planning predicated on patient-centered psychoeducation, shared goal-setting, and decision-making forged by a strong triadic relationship between clinician and the patient-caregiver dyad. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Trials missing primary efficacy end points raise the question of whether the choice of drug or the limitations of disease biology were at fault. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among active and passive anti-β-amyloid (Aβ) immunotherapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD), bapineuzumab and solanezumab, two humanized monoclonal antibodies, failed to show significant clinical benefits in mild-to-moderate AD patients in large Phase III clinical trials. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease, which is characterized by gradual cognitive decline associated with deterioration of daily living activities and behavioral disturbances throughout the course of the disease, is estimated to affect 27 million people around the world. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy- related inflammation (CAA-ri) is an aggressive disease subtype of CAA with characteristic clinical and radiological findings. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Inflammatory cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) typically affects older patients who present with acute or subacute cognitive decline, headache, behavioral change, seizures, and focal neurological deficits. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A once-daily, fixed-dose combination of memantine extended-release (ER)/donepezil 28/10 mg (Namzaric™) is available in the USA for patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease (AD) on stable memantine and donepezil therapy. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) were introduced in the therapy of Alzheimer Disease (AD) in the nineteen nineties with great expectations. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dugesia tigrina is a non-parasitic platyhelminth, which has been recently utilized in pharmacological models, regarding the nervous system, as it presents a wide sensitivity to drugs. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
The cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine are the current mainstays in the drug treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The evidence base, although incomplete, suggests that modest treatment effect sizes are offset by risk of considerable adverse effects. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The NMDA antagonist, memantine (Namenda), and the cholinesterase inhibitor, donepezil (Aricept), are currently being used widely, either individually or in combination, for treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease is, in part, characterised by the loss of neurones in the basal forebrain cholinergic cells that project to the cerebral cortex and hippocampus. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil is the most widely used acetylcholinesterase inhibitor licensed for symptomatic treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This standard is based on the results of large-scale, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 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.
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 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 →