There were 719 respondents (276 people with dementia, 443 carers). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 276 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Known and novel signals were identified via G/T/PWAS. 5 key findings →
Participants: 15,480 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
59/100
Three genome-wide significant associations were identified for p-tau181: TUBAP/rs76523946, P = 2.21E-08; CTNND2/rs142510573, P = 3.04E-08; CLSTN2/rs112448655, P = 3.04E-08, and one for t-tau (JHY/rs77264104, P = 2.84E-08). 5 key findings →
Participants: 375 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found genome-wide significant signals for agitation, anxiety, apathy, delusions, and hallucinations that were driven by the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele. 5 key findings →
Participants: 12,800 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
TREM2 variant carriers (64 ± 7 years, 54% female) did not show distinct clinical measures of AD at presentation compared to AD patients not carrying a TREM2 variant (64 ± 7 years, 52% female). 5 key findings →
Participants: 123 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dysregulated microglia activation, leading to neuroinflammation, is crucial in neurodegenerative disease development and progression. 1 key finding →
Participants: 90,716 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The global rise in both metabolic syndrome (MetS) and neurodegenerative diseases (NDs), particularly dementia and Alzheimer's disease (AD) poses a growing health and socioeconomic burden. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher synaptic latent factor (β = - 0.019, pFDR = 0.021) and YKL-40 (β = - 0.020, pFDR = 0.025) significantly predicted hippocampal atrophy. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The microbiota-gut-brain axis (MGBA) is an intricate bidirectional communication network that links intestinal microbiota with the central nervous system (CNS) through immune, neural, endocrine, and metabolic pathways. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
An initial database search yielded 3,977 studies of which 22 were included in this review. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PET participants lived longer in community (0.26 years, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05 to 0.45) and overall (0.15, CI: 0.02 to 0.27), but did not have statistically different health insurance (€703, CI: -3974 to 5045) or total costs including institutionalization (-€8258, CI: -20,622 to 3377). 5 key findings →
Participants: 440 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using blood samples from the publicly available ADNI research cohort (191 people with mild cognitive impairment or dementia), this study found the PrecivityAD2 blood test agreed with amyloid PET scans about 91% of the time. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 191 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings highlight the importance of personalized risk assessments and the development of tailored interventions based on genetic background to prevent dementia more effectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 182,473 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among 298 participants (MCI, n = 56; NC, n = 242; mean age 75.1 years; 45.6% female), the groups were similar in age, sex, race, and APOE ε4 status at baseline, as well as in most driving behaviors. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 298 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the intention-to-treat analysis, dementia risk was not different between GLP1-RA and DPP4i initiators (hazard ratio [HR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87–1.04; rates: 6.29 versus 6.64 per 1000 person-years; mean follow-up: 6.54 years); however, continuous GLP1-RA versus DPP4i use was associated with a 21% lower risk (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64–0.97; rates: 3.64 versus 4.82; mean follow-up: 2.71 years). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 107,424 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Plasma GFAP is a prognostic biomarker in CU older adults, predicting cognitive and biological changes, with stronger associations observed in females, highlighting a possible sex-specific vulnerability. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 949 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings suggest EPVS burden to be a potential marker of both CSVD and AD-related BBM pathology. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 979 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mean (SD) β-glucocerebrosidase levels were higher at week 26 (ambroxol, 12.45 [1.97] nmol/h/mg; 91% CI, 11.54-13.36 nmol/h/mg); placebo, 8.50 [1.96] nmol/h/mg; 91% CI, 7.65-9.34 nmol/h/mg; P = .05) in the ambroxol group compared with placebo. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 75 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE ε4 genetic variant is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) and is increasingly being implicated in other neurodegenerative diseases. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
However, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis did not support differences in orexin-A between AD and controls. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Donanemab (Kisunla®), an IgG1 monoclonal antibody targeting N-terminal pyroglutamate-modified forms of amyloid-β, is approved in the United States for treatment of early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
58/100
Of 413 477 All of Us participants, 2038 were eligible. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 26 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Uncertainty remains regarding the role of diet in colorectal cancer development. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
14 IPD-Work studies were assessed and six studies were excluded due to missing outcome data and unavailable data for pooling, resulting in the inclusion of eight studies with 124 909 participants. 5 key findings →
Participants: 909 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall PAF for the 14 modifiable risk factors was 59.5% (95% CI = 58.5-60.5). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 9,949 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 →