Prospective studies are needed to validate current findings. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Nursing home residents receiving palliative care are more likely to have a GP order. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PTSD in youth is common and debilitating. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although internal factors explain most about the poor nutritional status of aged residents in nursing homes, the factors related to nutritional care need further investigation to clarify their role in maintaining the nutritional status of aged residents. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The OCS-Plus represents a major methodological advance in dementia studies in LMICs, and enhances understanding of cognitive aging. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Future longitudinal studies examining the association of more severe depressive symptoms and cerebral tau accumulation are needed to substantiate this finding and to guide prevention and treatment in AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In-vivo labeling of retinal amyloid-beta(Aβ) and tau has potential as non-invasive biomarker for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We built and validated a deep learning algorithm predicting the individual diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment who will convert to AD (c-MCI) based on a single cross-sectional brain structural MRI scan. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Admission trends show that new residents were older and had greater multimorbidity and limitations in physical functioning over time. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Epidemiological and experimental studies suggest that a disease-aggravating neuroinflammatory process is present at preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Movement disorders have been carefully clinically defined, based on clinico-pathological series; however there is often diagnostic and prognostic uncertainty, especially in early stage disease. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Eighty-three apps were reviewed (stroke, N=8; migraine, N=25; Alzheimer's disease and dementia, N=8; depression, N=7; anxiety, N=14; apps targeting depression and anxiety, N=21). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In MCI subjects, the NCPT composite is significantly correlated with both a composite measure of established tests (r = 0.78, p < 0.0001) as well as with the ADAS-Cog (r = -0.55, p < 0.0001). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The number (%) of participants with frailty were 51 (9.1). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There were significant associations (p < 0.05) between the NPI variables (total score, Affective factor) and entorhinal and precuneus tau across all participants. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previous work indicates that resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is sensitive to functional brain changes related to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology across the clinical spectrum. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Diet is an important nonpharmacological risk-modifying factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
Average time to complete DEMQOL-CH was <5 minutes. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The majority of RC/AL patients were taking five or more medications; 16.0% of these patients were receiving IPMs. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study aimed to explore racial/ethnic differences in the attitudes toward Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and dementia caregiving among midlife women who were family caregivers of persons living with AD (MWPLAD) in the U.S. and examine the associations of the attitudes to their health outcomes. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This cross-sectional study examines upper bound and lower bound annualized Medicare costs for administering aducanumab to beneficiaries with the approved indications of mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most PWD (67%) met criteria for another manifestation of serious illness (24% advanced medical condition, 44% ADL impairment). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Findingss: upport multidomain prevention strategies targeting clustered modifiable risks. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although clinical routine focuses on dichotomous and visual interpretation of amyloid PET, regional image assessment in research settings may yield additional opportunities. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Elevated microglial activation in the right amygdala-entorhinal-hippocampal complex of App NL-G-F mice is associated with better spatial learning. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 (3.7% 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 →