27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Of 3285 included participants, the mean (SD) age was 70.4 (7.45) years; 1706 participants (52%) were female, 2661 (81%) had mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer disease, and 1777 (54%) used symptomatic medications for Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,087 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and aggregated tau are two core mechanisms that contribute to the clinical deterioration of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 396 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease is a progressive, irreversible, and fatal disease for which accumulation of amyloid beta is thought to play a key role in pathogenesis. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,638 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 813 participants in CREAD (mean [SD] age, 70.7 [8.2] years; 483 female and 330 male) and 806 in CREAD2 (mean [SD] age, 70.9 [7.7] years; 456 female and 350 male). 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 3,664 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mean CDR-SB score at baseline was approximately 3.2 in both groups. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,795 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We screened 18,884 papers and included 135 studies. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 135 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In participants with prodromal to mild AD in this randomized clinical trial, semorinemab did not slow clinical AD progression compared with placebo throughout the 73-week study period but did demonstrate an acceptable and well-tolerated safety profile. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 422 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The primary study randomized 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.2 [5.5] years; 145 female participants [53.3%]). 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 272 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Among 16 enrolled participants, the mean (SD) age was 32.6 (4.4) years; 9 participants were women, and 7 were men. 5 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The non-linear function indicates that a higher dose is not necessarily better in multidomain interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 749 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results suggest that the risk-benefit profile of mAbs remains unclear. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In 2021, aducanumab, an immunotherapy targeting amyloid-β, was approved for Alzheimer's disease (AD) by the US Food and Drug Administration thanks to positive results on a putative biological surrogate marker. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We identified 1,994 records in five different databases; after exclusion of duplicates, title and abstract screening, and full-text retrieval, 122 studies were finally included. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
One-hundred and twenty participants, with a mean (range) of 1.2 (1-4) strokes, a mean (SD) of 66.5 (53.8) months since the most recent stroke, mean (SD) baseline age of 70 (8) years, mean (SD) baseline ADAS-Cog-Plus of 0.22 (0.81), and 74 (62%) male participants, were randomized to EX (34 participants), ENRICH (34 participants), or BAT (52 participants). 3 key findings →
Participants: 34 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Addressing the need for rigorous longitudinal data for the effectiveness of music therapy in people with and at risk for developing AD, this trial aims to enhance knowledge regarding cost-effective interventions with potentially high clinical applicability. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ARIA-E is rare in cognitively unimpaired Aβ+ and Aβ- populations prior to anti-amyloid drug intervention. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,250 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study showed that some deficits on IC domains, as measured by simple screening tests and questions, can be associated with higher healthcare costs. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 442 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results depict that 5 Hz rTMS of the bilateral cerebellum is a promising, non-invasive treatment of cognitive dysfunction in AD patients. 4 key findings →
Participants: 27 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study shows that Hcy levels could modify the association between red blood cell n-3 PUFA and executive function. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,680 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, 1343 patients with MMSE scores were identified for internal validation and 285 [21.22%] took the drug recommended. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,772 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Long-term use of urate-lowering therapies (ULT) may reduce inflammaging and thus prevent cognitive decline during aging. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 51 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For optimal design of anti-amyloid-β (Aβ) and anti-tau clinical trials, we need to better understand the pathophysiological cascade of Aβ- and tau-related processes. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Validation of the safety and efficacy of ECT in patients with advanced AD with refractory agitation and aggression is necessary. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial 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 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.
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 →