Ann Neurol 2018;84:737-748. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 443 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Compared with participants who learned that they had a not elevated amyloid result, individuals who learned of an elevated amyloid result were no more likely to experience short-term increases in depression (mean [SD] change in the Geriatric Depression Scale score, 0.02 [1.3] vs 0.04 [1.3]; P = .90), anxiety (mean [SD] change in State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score, -0.02 [3.2] vs -0.15 [3.0]; P = .65), or suicidality (mean [SD] change in the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale score, 0.0 [0.4] vs -0.01 [0.5]; P = .67). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,167 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A dementia guideline-based disease management program led to substantial improvements in quality of care for patients with dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 408 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study failed to find a beneficial effect of exogenous melatonin, consistent with a number of other studies. 2 key findings →
Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence was weak for improving caregiver burdens in cancer and was absent for heart failure. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for age at baseline, gender, apolipoprotein genotype, and NYU paragraph delayed recall score, showed that higher BDI scores were associated with progression to AD (p = 0.03). 4 key findings →
Participants: 208 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among older adults with diabetes, no clear evidence was found that the incidence of dementia differed overall between patients using GLP-1RAs versus DPP4is. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 7,254 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Both the magnitude and the extent of brain activation during memory-activation tasks in regions affected by Alzheimer's disease, including the left hippocampal, parietal, and prefrontal regions, were greater among the carriers of the APOE epsilon4 allele than among the carriers of the APOE epsilon3 allele. 1 key finding →
Participants: 30 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
The rate of cognitive change in elderly persons with and without diabetes mellitus is similar, although cognitive performance is poorer in persons with diabetes mellitus. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,493 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Measures are needed that identify persons that will develop Alzheimer's disease in order to target them for preventative interventions. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
56/100
This study will provide clinically relevant data on the likelihood and time to relapse, and predictors of relapse, in patients switched from risperidone to placebo after response to risperidone treatment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are common in dementia and in predementia syndromes such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Epidemiological studies suggest that increased intake of the omega-3 (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is associated with reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 162 034 eligible Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 85.0 [7.9] years; 94 304 female [58.2%]), 51 191 (31.6%) were attributed to MSSP ACO. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 162,034 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Inflammation in Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients is characterized by increased cytokines and activated microglia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act added a new Medicare benefit, the Annual Wellness Visit (AWV), effective January 1, 2011. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 259 945 decedents with dementia (mean [SD] age, 85.8 [8.0] years; 60.4% female), 8.3% were non-Hispanic Black, 4.4% were Hispanic, and 87.3% were non-Hispanic White. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 2016, the UC Davis Latino Aging Research Resource Center and UC Davis Alzheimer's Disease Center brought together experts from across the country to consolidate current knowledge and identify future directions in aging and diversity research. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This cross-sectional study examines lecanemeb update among Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with Alzheimer disease or mild cognitive impairment and evaluates whether there are disparities among potentially eligible patients. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Physical activity improves overall health and reduces the risk of many negative health outcomes and may be effective in improving cognition, independent functioning, and psychological health in older adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings demonstrate that early life experiences influence the trajectory of cognitive aging. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although Alzheimer's disease (AD) is primarily a neurocognitive disorder, it also results in prominent neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early-onset Alzheimer disease (EOAD), with onset in individuals younger than 65 years, although overshadowed by the more common late-onset AD (LOAD), differs significantly from LOAD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During life, patients with AD pathology may be misdiagnosed with bvFTD if they have an early age at onset and prominent neuropsychiatric features despite having greater memory difficulties and more intact personality and executive functions than patients with bvFTD-FTLD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 23 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 27,380 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.
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 27,380 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 →