27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Statistically significant Pearson correlations between the neuropsychological tests and their tablet equivalents were found for all domains with moderate (r > 0.3) or strong (r > 0.7) correlations in 16 of 17 tests (p < 0.05). 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
BDNF levels did not change significantly and were not associated with improvement in overall neuropsychiatric symptoms or in cognitive function. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 1795 participants were enrolled (lecanemab:898; placebo:897). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,795 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals with multi-domain amnestic mild cognitive impairment (md-aMCI) have an elevated risk of dementia and need interventions that may retain or remediate cognitive function. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Twelve of 5536 studies met the inclusion criteria. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This is the primary Phase 3 Clarity AD trial report for lecanemab. 3 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 1,795 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This is the pivotal Phase 3 trial for donanemab in 1,736 people with early symptomatic Alzheimer's. Donanemab slowed decline on a combined cognitive/functional scale (iADRS) by about 22-35% relative to placebo over 76 weeks, depending on tau levels at baseline. 3 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 1,736 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previous data have linked omega-3 fatty acids with risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 103,651 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 1736 randomized participants (mean age, 73.0 years; 996 [57.4%] women; 1182 [68.1%] with low/medium tau pathology and 552 [31.8%] with high tau pathology), 1320 (76%) completed the trial. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 860 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on the results of the prespecified coprimary endpoints, this study was negative. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 624 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Where appropriate, we undertook subgroup analysis by modality (individual versus group), number of sessions and frequency, setting (community versus care home), type of control condition and dementia severity. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 37 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Consistent with previous reports, risk factors and prodromal features associated with PD included traumatic brain injury, odds ratio (OR), 1.62; 95% CI, 1.36-1.92; alcohol misuse, OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.44; hypertension, OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.26-1.31; anosmia, OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.59-2.93; and parasomnias (including RBD), OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.42-1.84. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 345 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma p-tau181/NfL can potentially be used to monitor large-scale population interventions in CU individuals. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 257 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This randomized trial gave hearing aids plus counseling, or only general health education, to 977 older adults with untreated hearing loss, then tracked cognition for three years. 4 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 977 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pooling 29 studies and over 2 million people, this meta-analysis found that people who were more physically active, especially at moderate-to-vigorous intensity, had a notably lower risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, though the protective association was stronger in studies with shorter follow-up periods. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,068,519 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher adherence to a MedDiet was associated with lower dementia risk, independent of genetic risk, underlining the importance of diet in dementia prevention interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 60,298 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this cohort study of a Korean population, decreased risk of dementia was associated with maintaining mild to moderate alcohol consumption, reducing alcohol consumption from a heavy to a moderate level, and the initiation of mild alcohol consumption, suggesting that the threshold of alcohol consumption for dementia risk reduction is low. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 3,933,382 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this exploratory analysis, the APOE ε3[R145C] missense variant was associated with an increased risk of AD among individuals of African ancestry with the ε3/ε4 genotype. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control Participants: 31,929 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Baseline and 3-month visit data were available for 272 participants in arm 1 and 260 in arm 2 (median [IQR] age: 71 [65-77] and 71 [65-77] years; 150/272 male [55%] and 135/260 male [52%]; 122/272 female [45%] and 125/260 female [48%]; median [IQR] education: 12 [10-15] and 13 [10-16] years, respectively). 3 key findings →
Participants: 844 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Low SES substantially increased the risk of dementia and cognitive dysfunction, suggesting that public health strategies could reduce the dementia burden by reducing social inequalities. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,485,702 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The association between metabolic syndrome (MetS) and incident dementia remains inconclusive. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 5,255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For Aβ42/Aβ40, cutoffs across cohorts were <0.059 (BioFINDER), <0.057 (ADNI), and <0.058 (UCSF). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 750 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of Alzheimer's disease are predominantly carried out in European ancestry individuals despite the known variation in genetic architecture and disease prevalence across global populations. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previously reported pathogenic variants in the six genes were identified in 1.35% of EOAD (3/223) and 6.58% of EOnonAD (5/76). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 299 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
One hundred twenty-eight participants (21.9%) developed dementia over a median of 7.1 years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 584 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →