66/100
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is the second most common cause of presenile dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 515 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The Rotterdam Study previously found that higher dietary intakes of vitamins E and C related to lower risk of dementia and Alzheimer disease (AD) over 6 years of follow-up. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,395 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Longitudinal fMRI provides a reliable indicator of brain activation over time, and may prove useful in identifying functional brain changes associated with cognitive decline on the trajectory toward clinical Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 21 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of bapineuzumab (AAB-001), a humanized monoclonal antibody to amyloid beta, were evaluated in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease in a phase 1, randomized, third-party unblinded, placebo-controlled, single ascending dose trial. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Three decades of genetic research in Alzheimer disease (AD) have substantially broadened our understanding of the pathogenetic mechanisms leading to neurodegeneration and dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The molecular pathways leading to Alzheimer-type dementia are not well understood, but the amyloid beta-protein is believed to be centrally involved. 4 key findings →
Participants: 14 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Studies of post-mortem tissue have shown that the location of fibrillar tau deposits, called neurofibrillary tangles (NFT), matches closely with regions of massive neuronal death, severe cytological abnormalities, and markers of caspase activation and apoptosis, leading to the idea that tangles cause neurodegeneration in Alzheimer's disease and tau-related frontotemporal dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Epidemiological evidence suggests that the incidence of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is increased in association with head injury. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although observational data cannot establish causality, our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that decreasing cardiac function, even at normal cardiac index levels, is associated with accelerated brain aging. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Executive predominant AD may reflect an alternative underlying pathophysiology related to genetic status, reflected in more prominent pathological alterations in frontoparietal regions subserving executive function. 2 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease has provided significant understanding of the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data support the hypothesis that neuronal endosomal dysfunction is associated with preclinical AD. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Iron influx increases the translation of the Alzheimer amyloid precursor protein (APP) via an iron-responsive element (IRE) RNA stem loop in its 5'-untranslated region. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent studies have suggested that children undergoing surgery under anesthesia could be at an increased risk for the development of learning disabilities, but whether anesthetics contribute to this learning disability is unclear. 4 key findings →
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 →