28,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Convergent evidence across the literature supports the use of resting-state connectivity as a biomarker of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,363 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Amyloid-β (Aβ) plaques and aggregated tau are two core mechanisms that contribute to the clinical deterioration of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 396 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The safety profile of aducanumab remained unchanged in the LTE of PRIME. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Subgroup analyses included (i) MCI versus mild AD; (ii) with versus without concomitant AD medications; and (iii) Apolipoprotein E (ApoE4) carriers versus non-carriers. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 8,010 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In a large international cardiovascular outcome trial in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiorenal disease, linagliptin did not modulate cognitive decline over 2.5 years. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,545 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
GLP-1 RA therapy did not alter amyloid-β and tau biomarkers nor show improvements in cognition but showed potential metabolic and neuroprotective benefits. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,444 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Memantine monotherapy improved cognition, behavior, activities of daily living, global function, and stage of dementia and was well-tolerated by AD patients. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,433 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results highlight the need for adequate isolation and protective measures. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 135 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Hearing loss is one of the top contributors to years lived with disability and is a risk factor for dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 723,266 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Greater adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with a significant improvement in health status, as seen by a significant reduction in overall mortality (9%), mortality from cardiovascular diseases (9%), incidence of or mortality from cancer (6%), and incidence of Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease (13%). 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 574,299 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 74 participants who were recruited into the OLE study between June 3, 2020, and April 22, 2021, 73 were enrolled and received gantenerumab treatment. 47 (64%) stopped dosing due to early termination of the study by the sponsor, and 13 (18%) prematurely discontinued the study for other reasons; 13 people completed 3 years of treatment. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 53 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
1795 participants with early AD were enrolled in Clarity AD, of which 1521 were ApoE ε4 heterozygotes or non-carriers (85 %). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,795 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Between July 22, 2014, and May 17, 2018, 261 participants entered the open-label phase. 211 were randomly assigned losartan (n=105) or placebo (n=106). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 105 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
1,307 patients with SCD and with CDR = 0 at baseline were included. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,307 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Significant study-site, specimen type, and batch effects were observed. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 604 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The analyzed parameters differentiate between controls and CAA with clinically useful accuracy (AUC > ∼0.85) but not between CAA and AD. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Identifying Aβ-positive individuals, irrespective of the measurement technique employed (CSF or PET), enables the detection of the most at-risk population before disease onset, or at least at a mild stage. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 7,793 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease is a progressive, irreversible, and fatal disease for which accumulation of amyloid beta is thought to play a key role in pathogenesis. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,638 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Epidemiologic studies suggest that a Mediterranean diet, an antioxidant-rich cardioprotective dietary pattern, delays cognitive decline, but clinical trial evidence is lacking. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 447 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 33,995 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among 68 756 unique individuals, analyses included 21 852 East Asian (demographic data not available), 5738 Hispanic (68.2% female; mean [SD] age, 75.4 [8.8] years), 7145 non-Hispanic Black (hereafter referred to as Black) (70.8% female; mean [SD] age, 78.4 [8.2] years), and 34 021 non-Hispanic White (hereafter referred to as White) (59.3% female; mean [SD] age, 77.0 [9.1] years) individuals. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control Participants: 68,756 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The likelihood of amyloid positivity was associated with age and APOE ε4 status. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 377 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In TRAILBLAZER-ALZ, 272 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.2 [5.5] years; 145 [53.3%] female) were randomized. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,955 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium (ADGC) performed a genome-wide association study of late-onset Alzheimer disease using a three-stage design consisting of a discovery stage (stage 1) and two replication stages (stages 2 and 3). 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Atypical antipsychotic drugs may be associated with a small increased risk for death compared with placebo. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,353 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%), 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.
1,038 records (3.6% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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 →