27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Older adults in senior living communities (SLCs) often face barriers to maintaining emotional well-being and family ties. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 90 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We investigated brain, inflammation, cardiometabolic, and gut health changes associated with a six-month multidomain lifestyle intervention in Dutch older adults at risk for cognitive decline and dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 53 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent advances in blood-based biomarkers have transformed the early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), enabling the identification of biological risk at preclinical and presymptomatic stages in a noninvasive and accessible manner. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Practice testing with detailed, corrective feedback is an effective intervention for targeting caregivers’ dementia-related knowledge. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This provides the first evidence in older adults with cognitive concerns that higher step counts are associated with fewer depressive but more anxiety symptoms. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 629 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A 12-week HIIT+RT intervention was more effective than HIIT alone in increasing the thickness/volume signature in individuals with CAD, yet no differences were observed compared to UC and the interventions did not affect the GMMD signature. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 105 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
DESI is a robust, fully automated MRI biomarker that sensitively detects CSF redistribution characteristic of DESH in iNPH. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,032 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In a recent open-label, single-arm study, vortioxetine, an antidepressant, was associated with improved cognitive function in patients with MCI, however, no placebo-controlled studies have been conducted to support these findings. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have an increased risk of developing dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Multidomain interventions have small but consistent beneficial effects on cognitive measures, suggesting the potential to reduce cognitive impairment and dementia risk. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 23,209 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In SPRINT, intensive vs standard SBP control yielded a significantly larger 4-year absolute risk reduction in dementia among APOE ε4 carriers (−1.7%) than non-carriers (0.2%; P-interaction = .045); the relative-scale interactions were directionally consistent but not significant. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 22,025,599 individuals screened, 2,051,275 were eligible; matched cohorts ranged from 10,113 to 857,773, with median follow-up of 4.7 to 7.2 years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Randomisation: Allocated 1 : 1 : 1 through Trials Unit, independently of trial team. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 326 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Two hundred and sixty participants were randomised (173 intervention, 87 TAU). 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The intention-to-treat analysis identified no differences in outcome between the intervention and control conditions on primary or secondary outcomes [self-reported quality of life in Alzheimer's disease: mean difference 0.07, standard error (SE) 0.65; F = 0.48; p = 0.53]. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 488 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The FDA gave lecanemab (Leqembi) accelerated approval based on Phase 2 data showing it reduced amyloid plaque in the brain, ahead of full Phase 3 results. 3 key findings →
Design: regulatory decision Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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 →