27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
These findings provide no evidence of a group-level Alzheimer-related p-tau217 elevation in young people with DSRD and support DSRD as a condition distinct from Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 132 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The highest-risk group (Q4) shows a 2.8-fold increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease, a 6.4-fold risk of multiple sclerosis, and a 2.4-fold higher mortality risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 38,967 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The innovative integrated models provide opportunity to assess Aβ pathology in a non-invasive and cost-effective way, which might facilitate AD-drug development, early screening, clinical diagnosis and prognosis evaluation. 2 key findings →
Participants: 609 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data from 1,272,495 individuals, with the mean age at diagnosis ranging from 76.8 years (South Korea) to 82.9 years (Germany), show that the overall median length of survival following recorded diagnosis ranges from 2.4 years (New Zealand) to 7.9 years (South Korea). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,272,495 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We investigated whether a discrepancy between chronological and biological age in midlife and late-life is associated with cognition and dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 11,758 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Outdoor activity is linked to lower dementia risk, particularly in those living in more accessible GS. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 187,724 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identify three distinct profiles: active healthy sleepers (AHS; 64.0%), fragmented poor sleepers (FPS; 14.1%), and long and frequent nappers (LFN; 21.9%). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings provide no evidence of a group-level Alzheimer-related p-tau217 elevation in young people with DSRD and support DSRD as a condition distinct from Alzheimer’s disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 132 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the fully adjusted model, the cumulative odds ratios (OR) are 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.25–1.31) for any dementia, 1.44 (95% CI: 1.36–1.53) for Alzheimer’s disease and 1.65 (95% CI: 1.48–1.83) for vascular dementia, associated with per unit increase in annual cumulative flooding exposure over lag 0–6 years. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Rapamycin is not detectable in the CSF before or after treatment, but several Alzheimer's disease and inflammatory biomarkers increase after treatment. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Here we show, psychiatric behavioural symptoms and difficulties in activities of daily living, fluctuate alongside cognitive decline. 677 activities of daily living and 632 psychiatric behaviour questionnaires are available at intervals of 3 months. 5 key findings →
Participants: 141 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accurate diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) with right anterior temporal lobe (RATL) predominance remains challenging due to lack of clinical characterization, and standardized terminology. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The MMSE model achieves a mean absolute error (MAE) of 1.84 (95% CI: 1.64-2.04) internally and 2.19 in external validation. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The apolipoprotein ε4 allele (APOE4) is associated with decreased longevity and increased vulnerability to age-related declines and disorders across multiple systems. 5 key findings →
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →