27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We investigated associations of neighborhood disadvantage with Alzheimer's Disease (AD)-related outcomes by biological and social factors in at-risk older adults. 1,880 U.S. POINTER participants with Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and cognition (PACC) were included. 868 had amyloid, tau PET, white matter hyperintensities (WMH), and/or gray matter volumes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The exposome factors, such as diet, lifestyle, microbiome, chemical exposures and social exposome, shapes human health beyond genetic influences, but the mechanisms remain only partially understood. 1 key finding →
Participants: 449 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At baseline, higher AgeAccelPheno was associated with lower amyloid-β42 to amyloid-β40 (Aβ42:Aβ40) ratio, and higher AgeAccelGrim2 was associated with elevated neurofilament light (NfL). 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Blood-based biomarkers have expanded access to biologically supported diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), particularly through measurement of amyloid-beta (Aβ) and phosphorylated tau species1-3. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Biological aging is the correlated decline of multi-organ system integrity central to the etiology of many age-related diseases. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Epigenetic clocks can predict pathological aging associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk, albeit findings are mixed regarding if clocks are predictive in blood and in non-European populations. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
While hippocampal (H) and inferior parietal lobule (IPL) atrophy are used routinely in Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnostics, the role of enlarged choroid plexus (ChP) remains unclear. 2 key findings →
Participants: 872 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Biological staging of individuals with Alzheimer's disease (AD) may improve diagnostic and prognostic work-up of dementia in clinical practice and the design of clinical trials. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 426 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To better characterize the genetic architecture underlying Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementia (ADRD), we performed a meta-analysis of European ancestry genome-wide association studies in 128,681 cases or proxy cases of ADRD and 849,833 (proxy) controls. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Established AD risk factors, including APOE ε4 dosage and polygenic risk scores, were not associated with disease progression amyloid positive individuals who are actively declining. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 222 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The cross-ancestry Bayesian PRS model demonstrated the highest predictive performance in non-European populations. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Single cell RNA sequencing has opened a window into clarifying the complex underpinnings of disease, particularly in quantifying the relevance of tissue- and cell-type-specific gene expression. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The complexity of Alzheimer's disease (AD) manifests in diverse clinical phenotypes, including cognitive impairment and neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPSs). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We identified significant clusters of tau-aggregation in praxis-related regions (e.g., supramarginal gyrus, angular gyrus, temporal, parietal and occipital regions) that were associated with apraxia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 32 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Living in locations with higher PM2.5 (per interquartile range [IQR]=3.17μg/m3) or NO2 (per IQR=6.63ppb) was associated with greater MTL atrophy (βPM2.5 = -0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]=[-0.41,-0.18]; βNO2 =-0.12, 95%CI=[-0.23,-0.02]). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 627 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Syn positivity (synSAA+) co-occurred with T (in synSAA+ vs synSAA-, 36% vs 20% T+; p=0.011) and with cognitive impairment (10% vs 7% MCI; 10% vs 0% dementia; p=0.00050). synSAA+ participants' cognitive performance declined ∼40% faster than synSAA-for Digit Symbol, but not other tests. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 420 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
When seen in isolation, LATE-NC have been associated with a predominantly amnestic profile and slow clinical progression. 4 key findings →
Participants: 922 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
AADAPt participants had risk factors for developing dementia in future, such as hypertension and hyperlipidemia, but also reported protective factors such as high social engagement. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 177 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 27,380 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.
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 →