28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This study found that CSF-based estimates using adjusted data-driven cutoffs were up to 10% higher than PET-based estimates in people without dementia, whereas the results were similar among people with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 97 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the discovery cohort, the mean (SD) age was 70.9 (8.5) years, 191 (58%) were male, the mean (SD) MMSE score was 27.1 (1.9), and 110 individuals with MCI (33%) converted to dementia (71 to AD dementia). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 110 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data support the use of cNfL as a biomarker of neuroaxonal damage and indicate that age-specific and sex-specific (and in some cases disease-specific) reference values may be needed. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,795 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Non-pharmacological therapies, such as physical activity interventions, are an appealing alternative or add-on to current pharmacological treatment of cognitive symptoms in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 802 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The BioFINDER-2 main cohort included 872 participants, with an additional 156 participants in the Knight ADRC cohort for independent validation. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,028 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 838 BioFINDER-2 participants (mean age, 73.9 [SD, 7.3] years; 431 women [51%]; 407 men [49%]) and 380 ADNI participants (average age, 72.9 [SD, 7.0] years; 194 women [51%]; 186 mean [49%]) included. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 838 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD), the leading cause of dementia, has an estimated heritability of approximately 70% 1 . 3 key findings →
Participants: 32,558 Evidence: low
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
Both high baseline GFAP (hazard ratio 3·6, 95% CI 2·2-5·7; p 42/40 , both GFAP (2·6, 1·4-5·0; p=0·0026) and amyloid β 42/40 (2·1, 1·2-3·6; p=0·0091) were independently associated with incident dementia whereas NfL was not (1·4, 0·8-2·5; p=0·28). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 300 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this genetic association study, a novel variant associated with AD was identified: R251G always coinherited with ε4 on the APOE gene, which mitigates the ε4-associated AD risk. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 37 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The SCIENCe study confirms that SCD is a heterogeneous group, with preclinical AD and subthreshold psychiatric features. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 114 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE-ε4 allele is associated with a moderately increased risk for progression from MCI to AD-type dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 35 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A rare coding variant (rs72824905, p.P522R) conferring protection against Alzheimer's disease (AD) was identified in the gene encoding the enzyme phospholipase-C-γ2 (PLCG2) that is highly expressed in microglia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 10,097 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Insoluble tau aggregates within neurofibrillary tangles are a defining neuropathological feature of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and closely correlate with clinical symptoms. 2 key findings →
Participants: 108 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Researchers performed a genome-wide association study of clinically diagnosed Alzheimer's disease and disease-by-proxy. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 386 participants, 199 (52%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 68 (8) years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 113 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Medial temporal lobe atrophy seems to be a more important predictor of cognition than small-vessel disease in MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 896 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Future work should incorporate clinicians to validate explanation methods and make conclusive inferences about dementia-related disease pathology. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Characterization of the genetic landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADD) provides a unique opportunity for a better understanding of the associated pathophysiological processes. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found that amyloid-β-positive cognitively unimpaired individuals were mainly characterized by decreased functional connectivity between the medial temporal lobe and regions in the anterior-temporal system, most prominently between left perirhinal/entorhinal cortices and medial prefrontal cortex. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This Position Paper evaluates the strengths and limitations of the International Working Group research diagnostic criteria and proposes advances to improve the diagnostic framework for Alzheimer's disease.
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Estimates of AD disease duration become more accurate if age, sex, setting, APOE, and cerebrospinal fluid tau are taken into account. 2 key findings →
Participants: 3,268 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) often represents an early form of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 28 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Plasma p-tau217 and p-tau181 were correlated (r=0·90, p diff =0·31) and in pathology-confirmed Alzheimer's disease (n=15, mean age 73 years [SD 12]) versus pathologically confirmed FTLD (n=68, mean age 67 years [SD 8]; AUC=0·96 [0·92-1·00] for p-tau217, AUC=0·91 [0·82-1·00] for p-tau181; p diff =0·22). 4 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →