Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 87 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 87 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The objective of this study was to determine whether treatment with the nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) indomethacin slows cognitive decline in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A recent randomized trial demonstrated clear cerebrospinal-fluid DHA target engagement without detectable improvement in cognition or brain volume over 24 months. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From October 2018 to March 2020, 58 participants were recruited (29 per group, 95% [86%-99%]). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 58 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall adherence rate to MI was 84.7%. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The maximal tolerated dose of PQ912 has been identified and the results support future studies at still lower doses reaching > 50% target occupancy, a longer up-titration phase to potentially induce adaptation and longer treatment periods to confirm the early signals of efficacy as seen in this study. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Intervention participants with MCI self-reported, or demonstrated, improved functioning across a range of cognitive (global cognitive function, executive function, processing speed, memory, attention, mood, emotion, motivation, brain cortex, orientation), and physical (gait, balance, mobility) outcomes. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We concluded that cognitive training along with active tDCS is a useful combined approach in the management of mood and cognitive dysfunctions in PD. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results suggest that standard and tailored cognitive training may improve executive function, attention/working memory, and memory in PD. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Beyond the well-known effects on cognitive impairment of the Mediterranean diet, a number of studies have investigated the possible action on cognitive decline of different botanicals and phytochemicals, most of which are well-known anti-inflammatory or antioxidant agents with a good tolerability and safety profile. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among frail older persons, cognitive training conferred the greatest cognitive benefits. 3 key findings →
Participants: 49 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In patients aged 65 years and older undergoing hip fracture surgery, regional anesthesia without sedation did not significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium compared with general anesthesia. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 476 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The findings support the reliability and validity of the Resistiveness to Care Scale for use with older adults with dementia in nursing home settings. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The facilitated approach explored in this study addressed known barriers to case conferencing. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
BAN2401 was well-tolerated across all doses. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The enrolled population of 84 subjects (31 homozygotes and 53 heterozygotes) was 52% females, mean age 69 years, MMSE 25.7 [70% mild cognitive impairment (MCI), 30% mild AD] with 55% on cholinesterase inhibitors. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 80 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In terms of efficacy, the review showed a statistically, but not clinically significant, improvement in favor of immunotherapy versus placebo. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
APOE -ε4 allele[s] is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA) in anti-amyloid beta therapy, and is also associated with cerebrovascular risk factors such as hyperlipidemia or atherosclerosis. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,313 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
BackgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is a growing neurodegenerative disorder causing cognitive decline, memory loss, and functional impairment. 1 key finding →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Donepezil is an effective and safe drug for the long-term symptomatic treatment of mild to moderately severe AD for up to 144 weeks (2.8 years), and sustained treatment may confer some advantages. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 763 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The current results do not support the notion that lithium treatment may lead to reduced hyperphosphorylation of tau protein after a short 10-week treatment in the Alzheimer's disease target population. 2 key findings →
Participants: 38 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ABSTRACTBackground:Age-related hearing and vision problems are common among people with dementia and are associated with poorer function, reduced quality of life and increased caregiver burden. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Florbetaben scans were assessed visually and quantitatively, and results were compared with amyloid plaque scores. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 82 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma phosphorylated Tau 181 (pTau181) and CSF chitinase-3-like protein 1 (YKL-40) increased following semorinemab treatment in both studies. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
All ChEIs significantly improved cognitive and neuropsychiatric measures. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
10 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 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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 28,180 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.
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 →