Isoprostanes and prostaglandins are biomarkers for oxidative stress and inflammation. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The apolipoprotein E (APOE)ε4 allele is the strongest genetic risk factor for late-onset AD and is associated with aberrant cerebrospinal fluid levels (CSF) of total tau (t-tau), phosphorylated tau (p-tau), and amyloid-β (Aβ). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
It is unknown whether multidomain interventions, which might preserve late-life cognition, affect Alzheimer's disease pathology. 4 key findings →
Participants: 527 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Elevated blood levels of phosphorylated tau (p-tau) are diagnostic of Alzheimer disease and are associated with the deposition of amyloid-β in the cerebral neuropil. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
It is largely unknown how alcohol use affects the risk of Alzheimer`s disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 301 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia in the world and its prevalence is increasing and it has important public health consequences. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alois Alzheimer described the first patient with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in 1907 and today AD is the most frequently diagnosed of dementias. 4 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
51/100
The Mini-Cog, a composite of three-item recall and clock drawing, was developed as a brief test for discriminating demented from non-demented persons in a community sample of culturally, linguistically, and educationally heterogeneous older adults. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Subjects 90 elderly subjects were studied (45 elderly and well persons from the independent living apartments of a continuing care retirement community and 45 patients with probable Alzheimer's disease). 4 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog) was developed in the 1980s to assess the level of cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The visual association test (VAT) is a brief learning task based on imagery mnemonics. 4 key findings →
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The authors report the prevalence of dementia in a community-dwelling Brazilian elderly population and correlate prevalence data with educational and socioeconomic levels. 4 key findings →
Participants: 118 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A literature search was conducted to identify the most frequently affected cognitive domains in PD and to select candidate items for the initial scale. 4 key findings →
Participants: 85 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The study aimed at mapping (i) the distributed electroencephalographic (EEG) sources specific for mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) compared to vascular dementia (VaD) or normal elderly people (Nold) and (ii) the distributed EEG sources sensitive to the mild AD at different stages of severity. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The different distribution of pathologic features in frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Alzheimer disease (AD) predicts a predominant dysexecutive syndrome in FTD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We administered 3 commonly employed tests of mental status (the Information-Memory-Concentration test [IMC], the Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE], and the Dementia Rating Scale [DRS]) to 92 patients with probable dementia of the Alzheimer type. 4 key findings →
Participants: 92 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
There were significant ethnic differences in mean MMSE scores among Chinese (26.2), Indians (25.0), and Malays (23.6), but only in noneducated subjects. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,092 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The aim of the study was to investigate the value of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) for use by general practitioners (GPs) in a group of elderly patients in whom the GPs are considering a dementia diagnosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 114 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The early diagnosis of vascular cognitive impairment has been challenged and executive control function has been suggested to be a rational basis for the diagnosis of vascular dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 104 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Accumulating evidence points to the superiority of the MoCA over the MMSE as a cognitive screening tool. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,492 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Neuroinflammation and synaptic degeneration are major neuropathological hallmarks in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 95 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) is widely used in AD, but may be less responsive to change when used in people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 4 key findings →
Participants: 811 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the most widely used brief screening measure of cognition, but it is not sensitive in detecting mild memory or other cognitive impairments. 4 key findings →
Participants: 788 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A decline in physical and/or cognitive function is a common feature of aging, and frailty has been shown to be associated with cognitive impairment and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are non-cognitive symptoms commonly associated to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,014 Evidence: low
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 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 →