ementia refers to a syndrome that is characterised by progressive deterioration of cognitive functions. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In pre-clinical Alzheimer’s disease, cerebral amyloid-β (Aβ) deposition precedes symptoms; Aβ-targeted therapies may have maximum benefits at this stage. 1 key finding →
Participants: 543 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil was well tolerated and most adverse events were mild. 5 key findings →
Participants: 22 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Few detailed clinico-pathological correlations of Parkinson's disease have been published.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
Clinical and neuropathological criteria forfrontotemporal dementia * Early loss of insight into the fact that the altered condition is due to a pathological change of own mental state. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 2935 patients (50.4% women; mean age=72.2 years; 19.8% subjective cognitive impairment, 39.8% mild cognitive impairment, and 40.4% dementia), larger WMH volume within projection fibres (B=0.24, SE=0.10, p=0.013) was associated with greater apathy. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,935 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has shown a great reduction in medial temporal lobe and hippocampal volume of patients with Alzheimer's disease as compared to controls.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Apathy was significantly associated with older age (p = 0.009), and a higher frequency of minor and major depression (p < 0.0001). 3 key findings →
Participants: 354 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Over the course of an individual’s lifetime, genomic alterations accumulate in somatic cells. 3 key findings →
Participants: 28 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
(1) The overall sensitivity of the NINCDS-ADRDA criteria in diagnosing "probable" AD from 56 patients with cortical dementia (AD and FTD) was 0.93. 5 key findings →
Participants: 56 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Depression was a strong risk factor for incident dementia with an OR of 1.76 (95% CI 1.63 to 1.90), a relationship which was found to be specific to depression rather than commonly proposed confounders. 5 key findings →
Participants: 557 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Serum beta-synuclein level was progressively increased in the AD continuum across the preclinical, MCI and dementia stages compared with controls and was correlated with serum pTau181 (r=0.710), NfL (r=0.494) and GFAP concentrations (r=0.621, p<0.001 for all). 5 key findings →
Participants: 56 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Expectation of reward potentiates sensorimotor transformations to drive vigorous movements. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Since its first description by Charcot, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) has been classified as a single neurodegenerative disease involving motor neurons. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Better understanding of sociodemographic factors of our patient group is key to improving equity of care. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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