27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among 171 Aβ-positive CU participants included in the main analyses, 119 (mean [SD] age, 73.0 [5.4] years; 60.5% female) were from the BioFINDER-1 study, and 52 (mean [SD] age, 64.4 [4.6] years; 65.4% female) were from the WRAP study. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 564 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Few nutritional interventions were found to convincingly improve cognition of individuals with MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 500 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Solanezumab, which targets monomeric amyloid in persons with elevated brain amyloid levels, did not slow cognitive decline as compared with placebo over a period of 240 weeks in persons with preclinical Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,169 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We report the case of a 79-year-old woman with Alzheimer's disease who participated in a Phase III randomized controlled trial called CLARITY-AD testing the experimental drug lecanemab. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The risk-benefit profile of anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains unclear, especially concerning their safety and overall effects on AD progression and cognitive function. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 14,980 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Newer GLDs were associated with a decreased risk of all-cause dementia in people with T2D. Because of the observational nature and significant heterogeneity between studies, the results should be interpreted with caution. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 819,511 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Nicotinamide riboside (NR) increases blood levels of NAD+, a cofactor central to energy metabolism, and improves brain function in some rodent models of neurodegeneration. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 15 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 109 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Caregivers often prioritize the needs of the care recipient and neglect their own health needs. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 243 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings reveal the potential for anti-Aβ therapies to compromise long-term brain health by accelerating brain atrophy and provide new insight into the adverse impact of ARIA. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 8,062 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that higher adherence to the MIND diet was associated with better cognitive function and potentially slower cognitive decline in later life. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 4,066 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The included studies (n=15) assessed change in cognition in response to a multidomain lifestyle intervention. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia prevalence is a global public health concern. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review suggests the advantage of combined interventions over exercise with comparable effects when compared with cognitive interventions in the population with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,910 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study provides preliminary evidence that falls among community-dwelling older adults are associated with factors such as age, female gender, fear of falling, history of falls, unclear vision, depression, and balance disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this study, NPTs have excellent potential to improve cognition in people with dementia, and PBM may have more significant benefits in improving cognition than the other four NPTs. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 38 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Metformin, thiazolidinediones, pioglitazone, GLP1RAs and SGLT2is were associated with reduced risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cost-effective strategies for identifying amyloid-β (Aβ) positivity in patients with cognitive impairment are urgently needed with recent approvals of anti-Aβ immunotherapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 348 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older adults with higher triglyceride levels within the normal to high-normal range had a lower dementia risk and slower cognitive decline over time compared with individuals with lower triglyceride levels. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 13,976 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 17 articles were identified. Plasma Aβ42/40 ratio was inversely correlated with aPET positivity r = -0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.65--0.31). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Emerging evidence suggests that treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) could be an interesting treatment strategy to reduce neurological complications such as stroke, cognitive impairment, and peripheral neuropathy. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 19 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results show that the western diet pattern is a risk factor for developing AD. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 38 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
An estimated 8.8 million Indians older than 60 years have dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,528 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Masitinib is an orally administered tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets activated cells of the neuroimmune system (mast cells and microglia). 4 key findings →
Participants: 182 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our analysis found that lecanemab showed significant positive statistical efficacy with respect to cognition, function, and behavior in patients with early AD though the actual clinical significance is yet to be established. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
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 →