32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Deposition of iron in the brain is proposed to play a role in the pathophysiology of the normal aging process and neurodegenerative diseases. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The study cohort included 1 415 265 long-stay nursing home residents with dementia who died between 2013 and 2022. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Three trajectory classes were identified: stable, slow decliners, and fast decliners. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer Network Observational Study (DIAN Obs) is a longitudinal, global cohort study investigating brain aging and autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease (ADAD), a rare monogenic form of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 547 310 older adults undergoing surgery, 43 041 (7·9%) had preoperative dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our results demonstrate that the repeatability of speech features extracted using open-source tool kits is low. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frailty and dementia are associated with poor health outcomes and increased health care utilization. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,132,367 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 1179 CU subjects (n = 474 females (40%), 70.9 ± 4.5 years old) of European descent who had pTau217 and PACC. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 474 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
O]water PET were strongest for 1800 msec single-PLD and generally decreased with longer PLDs, except the occipital lobe, where all PLDs showed poor agreement. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Three cohorts of interdisciplinary scholars (N = 53) have started and two have completed DEM-PCCT. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 53 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Demonstrated utility of the mCRT warrants further investigation into comparisons between the A and B versions, free versus cued recall and changes in performance over time to better understand sensitivity for tracking memory decline over time based on age and AD clinical status. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 272 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
China accounts for 1/5 of the global population and China faces a particularly heavy dementia burden due to its rapidly ageing population. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PurposeDelirium is a common yet preventable complication of hospitalization, surgery and illness that is associated with poor outcomes. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 49.17) had a higher incidence of psychotic disorder (p = .028) compared to non-progressors and progressors. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Adults with Down syndrome carry high risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease and efforts to include this population in clinical trials remain limited. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 237 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We estimated associations of educational attainment and Alzheimer disease genetic risk with treatment initiation and incident dementia and compared GLP-1 receptor agonist initiators with initiators of non-sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor second-line therapies, with a separate sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor compa 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 14,364 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
IntroductionFrontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is a devastating disease that commonly results in early onset dementia, yet its rarity and heterogeneity limit large-scale research and clinical trials. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 567 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For TabCAT tests, there were no notable floor or ceiling effects, and test scores were associated with age and education as expected. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 563 Evidence: moderate
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