30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
There is an extensive body of qualitative literature on the experiences of community-dwelling individuals with dementia on receiving and adapting to a diagnosis of dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,095 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Metrifonate was safe and well-tolerated. 1 key finding →
Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients with dementia differ in their behavioral and psychological symptoms according to their diagnosis with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or vascular dementia (VaD), requiring different symptom-management strategies. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Depression, anxiety, and apathy symptoms are highly prevalent across dementia stages. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 5,897 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Eighty-one percent of eligible participants were not aware of a dementia diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive impairment is present in approximately 30% of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and, especially when severe, has a negative impact on survival and caregiver burden. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,287 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Median survival was much lower than in screened populations. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Educational support for general practitioners should concentrate on epidemiological knowledge, disclosure of the diagnosis and management of behaviour problems in dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These findings highlight substantial disparities in the timeliness and comprehensiveness of dementia diagnosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 993 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Linking detailed HCAP cognitive assessments to the wealth of available longitudinal HRS data on cognition, health, biomarkers, genetics, health care utilization, informal care, and economic resources and behavior will provide unique and expanded opportunities to study cognitive impairment and dementia in a nationally representative US population-based sample. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,496 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We conclude that higher education AD patients experience faster cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 312 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At baseline measurements, amyloid burden does not distinguish between cognitively impaired and unimpaired subjects with PD without dementia, but our data suggest that amyloid contributes to cognitive, but not motor, decline over time. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 46 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 5 721 711 patients (3 302 579 female and 2 419 132 male) with incident dementia between 2014 and 2021 were included in the study. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 711 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Exposure to medications with severe AC cognitive burden may be a risk factor for developing MCI. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,690 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A meta-analysis of 27 primary studies was conducted to examine the relationship between neuropsychological functioning and driving ability for adults with dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Much can still be done in the way of service development and provision, GP training and education, and the eradication of stigma attached to dementia, to improve the early detection and management of dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using established clinical diagnostic standards for dementia the overall rate on routine outpatient neurological care is 28.6%, but using more sensitive neuropsychological measures, rates for cognitive impairment might be up to 2-fold higher. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 315 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Existing evidence regarding diagnostic disclosure in dementia is both inconsistent and limited with the perspectives of people with dementia being largely neglected. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Late-life depression is characterized by slowed information processing, which affects all realms of cognition. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
As the leading cause of dementia, Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major burden on affected individuals, their families and caregivers, and healthcare systems. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the machine learning verification, the identification accuracy of SCD, aMCI, d-AD from NC was higher when fused ALFF and fALFF features (76.44, 81.94, and 91.83%, respectively) than only using ALFF or fALFF features. 5 key findings →
Participants: 44 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral amyloid beta (Aβ) deposition occurs in a substantial fraction of cognitively normal (CN) older individuals. 3 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Total burden of comorbid neuropathologic abnormalities, rather than any single lesion type, was the most relevant determinant of cognitive impairment in both cohorts, often despite clinical diagnosis of only AD. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Factors impacting on time to diagnosis vary with the stage of diagnosis in YOD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 47 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Primary care is the ideal setting for early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD), as it serves as the primary point of care for most older adults. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events