Structural imaging studies investigating hippocampal volumes in patients suffering from major depression have yielded mixed results. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The hippocampus has been shown to demonstrate a remarkable degree of plasticity in response to a variety of tasks and experiences. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Complaints of poor memory by older people, particularly when new, may be a realistic subjective appraisal of recent brain changes independent of observed cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,336 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results suggest that longitudinal structural trajectories may differ in major depressive disorder patients according to their clinical response to treatment. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 26 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil-treated patients demonstrated significant improvements in cognition and global function compared with placebo-treated patients, and donepezil was well tolerated. 5 key findings →
Participants: 616 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Subclinical structural brain abnormalities in high-functioning older adults can increase the risk of developing physical disabilities and declining in motor performance. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,450 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In tandem with the ever-increasing aging population in low and middle-income countries, the burden of dementia is rising on the African continent. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
P-tau181 detected AD at MCI and dementia stages and was strongly associated with cognitive decline and gray matter loss. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
UGOT p-tau217 can be an easily accessible and efficient way to screen and monitor patients with suspected AD pathophysiology, even in the early stages of the continuum. 1 key finding →
Participants: 308 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Statins may modulate the phosphorylation of tau in humans and this effect may depend on the CNS availability of the statin. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), an astrocytic cytoskeletal protein, can be measured in blood samples, and has been associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 63 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
NfL in both serum and CSF has the potential to serve as a biomarker for clinical disease onset and has a prognostic value in genetic FTD. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 174 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
62/100
Recent studies suggest that blood total-tau originates principally from peripheral, non-brain sources. 5 key findings →
Participants: 609 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
CSF Aβ levels are altered in a subset of patients with early PD and relate to memory impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We used within-group locally estimated scatterplot smoothing models to compare the trajectory of biomarker changes with age in females versus males, as well as by apolipoprotein ɛ4 carriership. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 628 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Animal studies show aging varies between individuals as well as between organs within an individual 1-4 , but whether this is true in humans and its effect on age-related diseases is unknown. 5 key findings →
Participants: 5,676 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mass spectrometry plasma measures performed significantly better than any other measure (amyloid-β1-42/1-40: 0.817; 0.770-0.864 and amyloid-β composite: 0.820; 0.775-0.866). 2 key findings →
Participants: 502 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
GFAP was associated with amyloid and tau PET in multivariable models. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 200 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
62/100
Plasma Aβ42/40 was a robust biomarker for AD which was not affected by renal function. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 645 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a common neurodegenerative disease characterized by amyloid plaques and impaired brain metabolism. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 181 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These results suggest that prevalence of brain amyloid pathology differed, but that eligibility based on plasma was equally effective across racial and ethnic group members. 3 key findings →
Participants: 4,905 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A blood-based screening tool can serve as a method for increasing access to state-of-the-art AD clinical research by bridging between community-based and clinic-based settings. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,649 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
One hundred forty-six subjects (56 probable MCI-LB, 22 possible MCI-LB, 44 MCI-AD, and 24 controls) were reviewed for up to 5.7 years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, there are barriers to their use associated with sociodemographic factors and negative attitudes, as well as inadequate knowledge about technologies. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,172 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The DelApp test showed good performance, supporting the utility of objectively measuring attention in delirium assessment. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 50 Evidence: moderate
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
- 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →