Reliable biomarkers of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) are currently lacking. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Collectively, plasma biomarker findings in the low p-tau217 subgroup were more robust than in the mITT population. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mean age of completers (n = 30) was 73.5 years and mean Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) score was 22.5. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The combination of CSF biomarkers linked to different aspects of neurodegeneration, such as FABP3, α-syn, and AD biomarkers, improves the biochemical characterization of AD and Lewy body disorders. 4 key findings →
Participants: 48 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study is the first to delineate the trajectories of plasma biomarkers throughout the Alzheimer's continuum in the Chinese population, providing important implications for future trials targeting plasma GFAP to facilitate AD prevention and treatment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 206 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MPP-Aβ might be one of the potential blood biomarkers for the prediction of PiB-PET positivity in the brain. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 353 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found that kidney function seems to be associated with AD blood biomarker concentrations. 5 key findings →
Participants: 124 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MRI can also be used to assess comorbid vascular pathology and define homogeneous groups for inclusion or for subject stratification. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ApoE4 levels ascertained by the e4Quant test exhibited clear genotype-dependent stratification. 2 key findings →
Participants: 160 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In CU individuals from the development cohort, the combination of p-tau217 and Aβ42/40 significantly improved diagnostic accuracy (AUC: ALZpath 0.937 vs. 0.905, MSD 0.901 vs. 0.861; p < 0.05, DeLong test; 95% CIs) and model fit (AIC /BIC, p < 0.001) compared to p-tau217 alone. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,545 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Significant differences in AD biomarkers were observed among different groups. 5 key findings →
Participants: 238 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In asymptomatic individuals, brain volumes of hippocampal subfields and of the parahippocampal cortex were numerically larger in stage 1 compared to HCs, whereas the opposite was the case in individuals with SCD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma p-tau217 shows excellent results for detecting amyloid pathology at brain level in a clinical setting with an AUC of 0.95. 2 key findings →
Participants: 493 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Soluble plasma Aβ42/40 ratio is the most robust biomarker to discriminate between AD patients and CN individuals, as it normalizes for the number of NDEVs. 2 key findings →
Participants: 168 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
57/100
In two independent cohorts, t-tau and p-tau levels showed four subgroups. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,111 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this large cohort of patients with diabetes and dementia, the use of metformin and DPP-4i was associated with a slower decline in MMSE scores. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,873 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Masitinib administered as add-on therapy to standard care during 24 weeks was associated with slower cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease, with an acceptable tolerance profile. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 26 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recently, it has become clear that head trauma can lead to a progressive neurodegeneration known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The findings suggest that GPS driving may serve as an effective and accurate digital biomarker for identifying preclinical AD among older adults. 2 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that automated deep learning-driven processing of audio recordings of neuropsychological testing performed on individuals recruited within a community cohort setting can facilitate dementia screening. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuroinflammation has gained increasing attention as a potential contributing factor in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. 4 key findings →
Participants: 399 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers have been used to increase the evidence of underlying Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) tau and beta-amyloid levels in chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a disease which can be clinically indistinguishable from Alzheimer's disease (AD), are largely unknown. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 192 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Progressive and relatively circumscribed loss of semantic knowledge, referred to as semantic dementia (SD) which falls under the broader umbrella of frontotemporal dementia, was officially identified as a clinical syndrome less than 50 years ago. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Increasing variation greatly impacted the performance of plasma Aβ42/40 in discriminating Aβ status. 1 key finding →
Participants: 50 Evidence: low
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
- Randomized / 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
- Multicenter 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 32,180 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.
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 32,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66.5% of the library) and OpenAlex (15.8%), 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.
1,045 records (3.2% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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
Last updated