One hundred seventy-four patients fulfilled the trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 32 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
These results do not support the hypothesis that celecoxib or naproxen prevent Alzheimer dementia, at least within the early years after initiation of treatment. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Oxidative stress, inflammation, and increased cholesterol levels are all mechanisms that have been associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
71/100
LY450139 dihydrate, a gamma-secretase inhibitor, was studied in a randomized, controlled trial of 70 patients with Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →
Participants: 70 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Sertraline did not demonstrate efficacy for the treatment depression symptoms in patients with AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 67 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
71/100
There was no difference between groups in time to emergence of agitation or psychosis (Cox proportional hazard ratio, 0.96; P = .88). 3 key findings →
Participants: 122 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A distribution-based approach using data included in a systematic review approximated known MCIDs. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 12,449 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Intensive treatment was associated with a small but statistically significant greater decrease in hippocampal volume compared with standard treatment, consistent with the observation that intensive treatment is associated with greater decreases in total brain volume. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,267 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This randomized clinical trial demonstrated the positive effects of rTMS on cognitive and functional performance, and the plastic changes in the hippocampal-cortical network. 5 key findings →
Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 16 enrolled participants, the mean (SD) age was 32.6 (4.4) years; 9 participants were women, and 7 were men. 5 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
71/100
The non-linear function indicates that a higher dose is not necessarily better in multidomain interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 749 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After controlling for the baseline AES-C score, site, and comedication with donepezil or galantamine, the mean change in the AES-C score between the bupropion and placebo groups was not statistically significant (mean change, 2.22; 95% CI, -0.47 to 4.91; P = .11). 4 key findings →
Participants: 108 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In a proportion of patients, dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) copathology, which is linked to accelerated cognitive decline and more extensive cortical atrophy. 5 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nine phase 3 RCT cohorts from 8 eligible studies were identified, analyzing data from 6,315 patients. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 6,315 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These findings suggest medication-specific educational mailings targeting patients with AD or ADRD and their clinicians are not effective in reducing the use of high-risk medications. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 787 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hearing loss is independently associated with incident all-cause dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 639 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Forty studies from 12 countries met our inclusion criteria. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this study, both higher Mediterranean-type diet adherence and higher physical activity were independently associated with reduced risk for AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 282 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among military veterans, mTBI is associated with 56% increased risk of PD, even after adjusting for demographics and medical/psychiatric comorbidities. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 325,870 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 22 studies involving 43,637 women. 5 key findings →
Participants: 22 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Being married is associated with reduced risk of dementia than widowed and lifelong single people, who are also underdiagnosed in routine clinical practice. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Progressive dementia was detected by PET with a sensitivity of 93% (191/206) and a specificity of 76% (59/78). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 146 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The mean (SD) age of the study population sample (N = 3496) was 76.4 (7.6) years, and 2095 participants (60%) were female. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,496 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with respective matched nonusers, individuals receiving haloperidol had an increased mortality risk of 3.8% (95% CI, 1.0%-6.6%; P Conclusions and relevance The absolute effect of antipsychotics on mortality in elderly patients with dementia may be higher than previously reported and increases with dose. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 90,786 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In secondary analyses, the area under the curve (AUC) of [18F]flortaucipir SUVR was compared with 3 established magnetic resonance imaging measures (hippocampal volumes and AD signature and whole-brain cortical thickness), and sensitivity and specificity of [18F]flortaucipir in MCI due to AD vs non-AD neurodegenerative disorders were determined. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 719 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 29,780 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.
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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%), 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.
1,037 records (3.5% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →