Fifty-one AD patients enrolled, mean age 73.5. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
At randomization, the mean age is 72, 50% female, 77% with CDR-global score 0.5, and mean MMSE score 23.8. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 464 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on integrated review of laboratory, electrocardiogram, adverse events, and MRI, AAB-003 was safe and well tolerated up to 8 mg/kg for up to 91 weeks (FIH and extension trials) in patients with mild to moderate AD. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 52 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Potential DMT candidates at Butler MAP (n = 50), primarily diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (n = 29 [58%]) or mild dementia (21 [42%]), were predominantly Aβ-positive (38 [76%]), and half (25 [50%]) were subsequently treated with aducanumab. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 150 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Weight loss predicts AD CSF and PET biomarker results and may occur downstream to amyloid-β accumulation in preclinical AD, paralleling cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,743 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
As the field moves towards primary prevention, we expect an increase in the use of fluid-based biomarkers to determine disease modification. 4 key findings →
Participants: 121 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Association of cell-bound Aβ(1-40) in blood with left hippocampal volume was much stronger than previously observed in Aβ plasma fractions. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 96 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on family informant reports and clinical observations, the median age at onset (AAO) among affected individuals in these pedigrees was 48.50 (44.0, 51.8) years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 206 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
72/100
This fully-automated and available blood-based biomarker assay therefore may be useful for early detection, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment monitoring of AD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 463 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Lecanemab was generally well tolerated by most patients with early AD and treatment appeared to be more effective and safer in patients with low CSF-ptau181 levels. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 234 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings demonstrate that 10-year CP exposure was associated with a 1.707-fold increase in the risk of developing AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 9,291 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In community and clinical settings, SCC predict both dementia and depression in the absence of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 6,357 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study suggests that plasma Aβ42/Aβ40, as determined by this MS-based assay, has potential value as an accurate and cost-effective tool to identify individuals in the earliest stages of AD, supporting its implementation in clinical trials, preventative strategies and clinical practice. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 200 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
72/100
We performed linear regression analysis to identify factors associated with the DTI-ALPS index. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,249 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study suggests that the prognostic capacity of plasma NfL may be amplified in individuals with Aβ or hypertension. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 720 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Variants of the gene triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-2 (TREM2) increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our systematic review shows evidence for disruptions in (night-time) melatonin levels in AD as compared to age-matched controls. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Between July 2023 and January 2025, 169 patients were screened and 86 initiated lecanemab treatment. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
71/100
Plasma p-tau217 showed the strongest individual association with Aβ PET status (area under the curve [AUC], 0.85). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,407 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
None of the three plasma biomarker was associated with NPS at baseline. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 76 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
71/100
A total of 32,901 (1.12%) participants developed dementia, of which 74.4% and 11.0% were attributable to Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia, respectively, during the median follow-up of 5.5 years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,930,816 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MMP-9 may have more detrimental effects on AD-related pathological and cognitive changes in women. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 238 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found no evidence to suggest that the current assumption of constant age-specific prevalence of dementia over time is ill-founded. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This is the first randomized trial to investigate the impact of a ketogenic diet in patients with uniform diagnoses of AD. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 26 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ROC curves of the five best two-, three-, and four-parameter combinations were analyzed for significant superiority by a bootstrapping wrapper around a support vector machine with linear kernel. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 115 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events