Our findings suggest that VR training is an effective treatment for both people with MCI and dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
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.
The intervention effect was found in delayed verbal memory. 4 key findings →
Participants: 29 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This population-based study in community-dwellers aged 70 years or over suggested that multidomain intervention and n3 PUFA supplementation have not significant effects on cognitive function change in frail older adults with memory complaints. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our analyses support that MNPI could improve the global cognition in older adults with MCI. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Poor external validity can result in inadequate treatment decision information. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Interventions using educational outreach, on-site education given alone or as part of an intervention package and pharmacist medication review may under certain circumstances reduce inappropriate drug use, but the evidence is of low quality. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
Cardiovascular activity has been shown to be positively associated with gray and white matter volume of, amongst others, frontal and temporal brain regions in older adults. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
Racial/ethnic groups differed in sources of recruitment, reasons for screen failure, and overall probability of eligibility in a preclinical AD trial. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,945 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Aβ plaques removal in the brain due to amyloid therapy is strongly correlated with a better clinical response in patients with early Alzheimer's disease and a higher ARIA-E rate for the treatment groups and clinical trials in this meta-analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The positive finding of lower EV Aβ42 supports emerging evidence that plasma neuronal EVs provide an effective platform for demonstrating biomarker responses in clinical trials in AD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Because of flawed methods and small clinical benefits, the scientific basis for recommendations of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease is questionable. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Due to valued informal care, costs of care for community-living patients with moderate dementia are significantly higher than for patients with mild dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
A Systematic ReviewObstructive sleep apnoea, positive airway pressure treatment and postoperative delirium: protocol for a retrospective observational studyEvidence supporting the best clinical management of patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy: a systematic guideline review and expert consensusDeprescribiendo para mejorar la salud de las personas o cuando deprescribir puede ser la mejor medicinaThe use of proton pump inhibitors among older adults with intellectual disability: A cross sectional observational studyNeed for Comprehensive Health Care Quality Measures for Older AdultsDevelopment and initial validation of prescribing quality indicators for patients with chronic kidney diseaseOlder patients' prescriptions screening in the community pharmacy: development of the Ghent Older People's Prescriptions community Pharmacy Screening (GheOP³S) toolA New Computer-Based Tool to Reduce Potentially Inappropriate Prescriptions in Hospitalized Geriatric PatientsThe Successful Aging After Elective Surgery Study: Cohort Description and Data Quality ProceduresRoutine deprescribing of chronic medications to combat polypharmacyAnnual Cognitive Assessment for Older Adults: Update for NursesThe impact of pharmaceutical care interventions for medication underuse in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysisAssessing appropriateness of osteoarthritis care using quality indicators: a systematic reviewCurrent Factors of Fragility and Delirium in Vascular SurgeryDrug-related problems identification in general internal medicine: The impact and role of the clinical pharmacist and pharmacologistPrescription of potentially inappropriate drugs for geriatric patients in long-term care: improvement through pharmacist's interventionChanging practice in dementia care in the community: developing and testing evidence-based interventions, from timely diagnosis to end of life (EVIDEM)High Prevalence of Poor Quality Drug Prescribing in Older Individuals: A Nationwide Report From the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA)Delirium in elderly peopleDelphi consensus statement: Quality indicators for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Comprehensive Care UnitsPotentiality of STOPP/START criteria used in primary care to effectively change inappropriate prescribing in elderly patientsToo Much to ManageHip Fracture ManagementAppropriateness of Medication Prescribing Using the STOPP/START Criteria in Veterans Receiving Home-Based Primary CareActualización de la neumonía en el ancianoEstablishi 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In conjunction with the NILVAD trial, a European Multicentre Double-Blind Placebo Controlled trial of Nilvadipine in Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD), there are four NILVAD substudies in which eligible NILVAD patients are also invited to participate. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among eligible participants (n = 705,061), 264,294 individuals (37.5% of eligible participants) initiated any statin during 2001-2010 ("initiators"), of whom 249,613 (94.4%) were matched with 255,937 unique noninitiators to create the analytic sample (322,358 unique participants; mean age at baseline = 67.4 years; 55.1% female). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 322,358 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The (11)C-PiB-PET imaging results demonstrated reduction of fibrillar Aβ accumulation in patients with Alzheimer disease treated with bapineuzumab; however, as no clinical benefit was observed, the findings are consistent with the hypotheses that bapineuzumab may not have been initiated early enough in the disease course, the doses were insufficient, or the most critical Aβ species were inadequately targeted. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 115 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Collaborative care for the treatment of Alzheimer disease resulted in significant improvement in the quality of care and in behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia among primary care patients and their caregivers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) commonly exhibit psychosis and behavioral disturbances that impair patient functioning, create caregiver distress, and lead to institutionalization. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Published studies suggest that greater adherence to Mediterranean diet is associated with slower cognitive decline and lower risk of developing Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Atorvastatin treatment may be of some clinical benefit and could be established as an effective therapy for Alzheimer disease if the current findings are substantiated by a much larger multicenter trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 98 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The findings support the clinical efficacy of CR in early-stage AD. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In this trial, memantine did not show an advantage over placebo based on protocol-specified primary or secondary analyses in patients with mild to moderate AD on stable ChEI regimens. 2 key findings →
Participants: 433 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
66/100
Statistically significant effects of AZD0530 treatment were not found on relative CMRgl reduction in an Alzheimer disease-associated region of interest or on secondary clinical or biomarker measures. 3 key findings →
Participants: 159 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive decline over 36 months of continuous galantamine treatment was substantially less than the predicted cognitive decline of untreated patients with mild to moderate dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 119 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Preparations based on special extracts of the Ginkgo biloba tree are popular in various European countries. 3 key findings →
Participants: 79 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
From across this tag
9 of the 1,875 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 9. The same 9 appear here every time.
- The effects of 7-week cognitive training in patients with vascular cognitive impairment, no dementia (the Cog-VACCINE study): A randomized controlled trial
- Effect of citalopram on agitation in Alzheimer disease: the CitAD randomized clinical trial
- Impact of Donepezil and Memantine on Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Alzheimer Disease: Six-month Open-label Study
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 class drugs show clear protective effects in Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease clinical trials: A revolution in the making?
- [Clinical efficacy and safety of huperzine Alpha in treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer disease, a placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial]
- A multicenter, blinded, randomized, factorial controlled trial of doxycycline and rifampin for treatment of Alzheimer's disease: the DARAD trial
- Efficacy and Safety of Cilostazol in Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- Randomized, double-blind study of zervimesine in mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease
- APOE ε4 Carrier Status and Cognitive Decline in Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease: A Linear Mixed-Effects Analysis of the Placebo Arm of EXPEDITION 1
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 →