Protein misfolding is a fundamental biological process with profound implications for human health and disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Neurodegenerative disorders are devastating disorders characterized by gradual loss of neurons and cognition or mobility impairment. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Intraneuronal dysproteostasis and extraneuronal microenvironmental abnormalities in Alzheimer's disease (AD) collectively culminate in neuronal deterioration. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder marked by neuronal loss, cognitive decline, and pathological hallmarks such as amyloid-beta (Aβ) plaques and tau neurofibrillary tangles. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Evidence indicates that chronic proteotoxic stress, arising from aging, oxidative damage, and environmental influences, disrupts the proteostasis network (PN). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a complex neurodegenerative disease that affects elderly individuals, characterized by senile plaques formed by extracellular amyloid beta (Aβ). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Autophagy plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis and progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the primary cause of dementia in older individuals, exhibiting an increasing incidence worldwide. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Microglia impact brain development, homeostasis, and pathology. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pathological tau disrupts protein homeostasis (proteostasis) within neurons in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
People with early-stage AD and their spousal caregivers provided support to each other often. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The employed family caregivers juggle caregiving and work responsibilities constantly, highlighting a growing concern for their financial and professional well-being. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Contrary to expectations, pain and mental health measures for PLWAD displayed a trend toward negative correlation with their hair cortisol levels. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Alzheimer's disease and other dementias are expected to affect millions of individuals in the coming decades, placing a growing burden on healthcare systems, families, and caregivers. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Over four years (2019-2023), we received 62 applications, reviewed 58 applications, and funded 21 projects (4-5 per year). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Family caregivers of older adults living with severe dementia had the highest baseline Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) score of 27.7 which decreased to 25.0 (p < .05); family caregivers of those living with moderate dementia had a baseline ZBI score of 24.3 which decreased to 20.4 (p < .01); and family caregivers of those living with mild dementia had the lowest baseline ZBI score of 21.0, which decreased to 18.0 (p < .01). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
There was a strong correlation between carer- and self-rated QoL, with patients consistently rating their QoL higher than caregivers. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This article estimates the prevalence and identifies risk factors of resident aggression and abuse in assisted living facilities. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is essential for high-quality palliative care (PC) for persons with dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
LGBTQ + older adults have a high likelihood of accessing nursing home care. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older age and comorbid conditions increase risk for severe for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
There were 1673 teleconsultations conducted with 850 unique patients. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
This article describes and illustrates a framework that may be used when assessing the moral basis of everyday issues that can affect residents of assisted living facilities. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
The increasing elderly population is driving higher utilization rates of long-term care facilities, where residents often have multiple chronic diseases, making them potential candidates for palliative care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although much of the research on service use by older adults with dementia relies on proxy reports by informal caregivers, little research assesses the accuracy of these reports, and that which does exist, does not focus on home care services. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →