Changing staff practice in nursing homes is possible but complex. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Urinary tract infections, pressure areas, pneumonia and delirium are potentially preventable hospital-acquired complications. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These contrasting illness narratives affect and shape the experiences, thoughts, and fears of patients and their carers in the last months of life. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 156 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Long-term exposure to the highest tertile of PM10 or ozone was significantly associated with an increased risk of AD and VaD. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The impact of comorbidities present at the time of transplantation changes with time after transplantation. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
60/100
The distribution of microbleeds revealed different associations with amyloid-β and phosphorylated tau 181 protein levels and cognition. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 626 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Low plasma levels of apoE are associated with increased risk of future Alzheimer disease and all dementia in the general population, independent of ε2/ε3/ε4 APOE genotype. 3 key findings →
Participants: 75,708 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The mean (SD) age at death was statistically significantly younger for participants who had AD with Lewy bodies (77.9 [9.5] years) than for participants who had AD without Lewy bodies (80.2 [11.1] years) (P = .01). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ABT-089, an α4β2 neuronal nicotinic receptor partial agonist, was evaluated for efficacy and safety in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease patients receiving stable doses of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 337 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Only 11 putative risk factors for delirium are supported by either strong or moderate level of evidence. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results provide additional evidence that depressive symptoms determine an additive risk effect to the progression to dementia in subjects with MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
59/100
Frontotemporal dementia is an umbrella clinical term that encompasses a group of neurodegenerative diseases characterised by progressive deficits in behaviour, executive function, or language. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
International hospital-based studies have indicated a high risk of cognitive impairment after stroke, evidence from community-based studies in China is scarce. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 599 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The objective of the study was to examine variability across multiple prospective cohort studies in level and rate of cognitive decline by race/ethnicity and years of education. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 4,115 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
The rate of cognitive change in elderly persons with and without diabetes mellitus is similar, although cognitive performance is poorer in persons with diabetes mellitus. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,493 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
Vascular dementia is one of the most common causes of dementia after Alzheimer's disease, causing around 15% of cases. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
C9orf72 mutations are the most common cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Tauopathies, including frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD), are neurodegenerative diseases in which tau fibrils accumulate. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer disease (AD) is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid plaques, which are predominantly composed of amyloid-β peptide. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although advancing age is the strongest risk factor for the development of symptomatic Alzheimer disease (AD), recent studies have shown that there are individual differences in susceptibility to age-related alterations in the biomarkers of AD pathophysiology. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 268 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Measures of neuronal loss are likely good surrogates for clinical and radiological disease progression in Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 23 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Widespread implementation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in clinical settings requires improved accuracy for diagnosis of prodromal disease and for distinguishing AD from non-AD dementias. 4 key findings →
Participants: 338 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results provide evidence of the potential of Souvenaid™ therapy for the treatment of behavioral disturbances and social cognition skills in FTD. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A panel of nine CSF biomarkers was able to differentiate APS from patients with PD and dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The CAD106 first-in-human study demonstrated a favorable safety profile and promising antibody response. 4 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 47 Evidence: high
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 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.
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 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 →