The total cost of disorders of the brain was estimated at €798 billion in 2010. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review 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.
Of 31 624 156 adults discharged from French hospitals between 2008 and 2013, 1 109 343 were diagnosed with dementia and were included in the analyses. 2 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 156 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neurofilament proteins have been validated as specific body fluid biomarkers of neuro-axonal injury. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 137 randomized participants, 2 were excluded for not meeting eligibility criteria, leaving 135 (mean [SD] age, 69.3 [3.8] years; 83 female [61%]) eligible for analysis. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is evidence that physical activity (PA) is of cognitive benefit to the ageing brain, but little is known on the effect in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
A new diagnostic indicator of FDG PET scan abnormality, based on age-adjusted t statistics and an automated voxel-based procedure, is presented and validated in a large data set comprising 110 normal controls and 395 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) that were studied in eight participating centers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Standardized automated analysis of (18)F-FDG PET scans may provide an objective and sensitive support to the clinical diagnosis in early dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 548 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Using established clinical diagnostic standards for dementia the overall rate on routine outpatient neurological care is 28.6%, but using more sensitive neuropsychological measures, rates for cognitive impairment might be up to 2-fold higher. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 315 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Prevalence: It is estimated that each year 38.2% of the EU population suffers from a mental disorder. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Biomarkers useful for the predementia stages of Alzheimer's disease are needed. 2 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our cost model revealed that brain disorders overall are much more costly than previously estimated constituting a major health economic challenge for Europe. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Reducing heavy alcohol use may be an effective dementia prevention strategy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cytosolic aggregation of the RNA binding protein TDP-43 (transactive response DNA-binding protein 43) is a hallmark of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and frontotemporal dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data provide evidence for clinical and functional heterogeneity among subjects with aMCI and suggest that 18FDG-PET findings combined with memory scores may be useful in predicting short-term conversion to AD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our findings support speech-based cognitive assessments as a promising avenue towards remote MCI screening, with implications for scalable screening in clinical trials and healthcare. 3 key findings →
Participants: 110 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary pathology play important roles in Alzheimer disease (AD), our understanding of AD is incomplete, and the contribution of microglia and iron to neurodegeneration is unknown. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Depression and dementia are major public health problems. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Aging is regarded as a major risk factor for neurodegenerative diseases. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Parkinson's disease (PD) exhibits a variety of symptoms, with approximately 25% of patients experiencing mild cognitive impairment and 45% developing dementia within ten years of diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Simple, non-invasive tests for an early detection of degenerative dementia by use of biomarkers are urgently required. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
39/100
Several concepts, which in the aggregate get might be used to account for "resilience" against age- and disease-related changes, have been the subject of much research.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The design of the physical environment plays a major role in supporting the wayfinding abilities of people with dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 →