The trial occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 106 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.
During a median follow-up of 7.98 years, 896 incident dementia cases were identified among study participants. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 31,587 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified a total of 1,686,759 patients with incident dementia (mean (SD) age, 82.15 (6.90) years; 61.70% female) and 3,373,518 matched controls (mean (SD) age, 82.15 (6.90) years; 61.70% female). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,686,759 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
(n = 16,683) had an average age of 69.07 ± 7.34, 72.04% were female, and had an average of 16.66 ± 2.26 years of education. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 16,683 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
We discovered a remarkable gender-specific difference in DEGs that distinguish P-MCI from S-MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 28 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Personalized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the precuneus (PC) is emerging as a new non-invasive therapeutic approach in treating Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants' median age was 70.7 years (Q1-Q3 = 67.8-74.0), with 52.4% being women. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 678 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Individuals with rapid progression were more likely to have at least one APOE ε4 allele (OR: 2.08 [95% CI: 1.16–3.74], p < 0.01), higher Braak stage (2.19 [1.20–3.98], p < 0.01), higher Thal phase (2.45 [1.24–4.83], p < 0.01), more severe white matter rarefaction (1.68 [1.21–2.35], p < 0.01), and in the final 24 months of life, more frequent untreated/undertreated hyperlipidemia (1.74 [1.35–5.56], p < 0.01) and less frequent untreated/undertreated depression (0.40 [0.17–0.91], p < 0.05). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 75 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Plasma p-tau217 and p-tau231 were most effective in diagnosing aMCI/AD (AUC = 0.95 and 0.93, respectively), while p-tau217, p-tau231 and p-tau181 presented the best differential diagnosis for AD from PSP, FTD and DLB respectively (AUC = 0.84, 0.81 and 0.83). α-synuclein was presented as the best biomarker for PSP variant and behavior variant FTD subtypes (AUC = 0.81 and 0.74, respectively). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 668 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found significant impacts of hypertension, diabetes and their comorbidity on cognitive impairment occurrence. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 40,103 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
55/100
CSF SDC4 levels were elevated in AD, including the earliest preclinical stages, compared to controls and were closely associated with CSF and imaging biomarkers of amyloid and tau, and CSF biomarkers of neuronal and synaptic injury, astrocytic reactivity and microglial dysregulation. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,041 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A single-timepoint ResNet3D model achieved modest performance (c-index ~ 0.70). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
LIGHT will provide insight into the implementation and (cost-)effectiveness of a lifestyle intervention for indicated prevention in a memory clinic setting. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study cohort comprised a total of 6108 individuals diagnosed with AD dementia during the study period (28.4% males and 71.6% females). 5 key findings →
Participants: 6,108 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 118,790 participants (average age 64.26 ± 9.95 years, 48% male), 16.7% developed dementia during an average follow-up of 7.3 ± 2.3 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 118,790 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over a median follow-up of 8.2 years, YOD incidence increased progressively with higher WC. 5 key findings →
Participants: 964,536 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Actigraphy accurately identifies different dementia etiologies and could serve as a supplement to diagnostic investigations in patients with suspected AD for differential diagnostic purposes. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 29 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease has provided significant understanding of the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
, respectively (p-values < 0.05), with p-tau217 demonstrating the highest classification accuracy for Aβ-PET status (AUC = 0.94). 4 key findings →
Participants: 113 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Preventing dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a global priority. 2 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The crude prevalence of dementia significantly increased from 1985 to 2012 (6.7% in 1985, 5.7% in 1992, 7.1% in 1998, 12.5% in 2005, and 17.9% in 2012, p for trend < 0.01), but then decreased significantly from 2012 to 2022 (15.8% in 2017 and 12.1% in 2022; p for trend < 0.01). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 803 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the cohort, 39.2% (67/171) tested positive by α-syn SAA. α-syn SAA positivity was more frequently detected alone than in combination with biomarkers of AD pathology (25.1% vs. 14.0%). α-syn SAA+ status was independently associated with higher odds of fluctuating cognition (OR 2.99, 95%CI 1.46–6.25, p = 0.012), visual hallucinations (OR 2.41, 95%CI 1.24–4.75, p = 0.027), extrapyramidal signs (OR 4.57, 95%CI 2.35–9.11, p < 0.001) and akinetic mutism (OR 3.77, 95%CI 1.22–12.82, p = 0.038). 5 key findings →
Participants: 171 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Soluble N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment proteins receptors (SNARE) proteins, such as VAMP-2 and SNAP-25, are implicated in α-synuclein pathophysiology and CSF levels of these proteins are associated with pathophysiological biomarkers and cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 62 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MDS varied significantly by age, sex, education, and language of administration even among participants with normal cognition. 5 key findings →
Participants: 25,330 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A significant median Centiloid reduction of 30.9 was observed, with a 24.1% amyloid PET negativity rate after six months. 3 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: moderate
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 →