27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
These programs are considered beneficial nonpharmacological cognitive training interventions for middle-aged women at high risk of cognitive impairment. 1 key finding →
Participants: 30 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sickness at admission and functional impairment do not explain the increase in DNR orders with age or the disparity across diagnosis. 1 key finding →
Participants: 14,008 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The IADL-E is a reliable, sensitive and responsive scale of functional abilities useful in dementia screening in a socioculturally heterogeneous population. 2 key findings →
Participants: 240 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia, a chronic and progressive cognitive declination of brain function caused by disease or impairment, is becoming more prevalent due to the aging population. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Many researchers have sought to construct diagnostic models to differentiate individuals with very mild dementia (VMD) from healthy elderly people, based on structural magnetic-resonance (MR) images. 1 key finding →
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) has long been considered to be a purely motor disorder. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Laboratory-specific reference values for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Alzheimer disease (AD) biomarkers are necessary. 4 key findings →
Participants: 71 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Currently available literature on the relationships between cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers and cognitive performance in frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is very limited and inconclusive. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 61 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is a brief cognitive screening instrument developed by Nasreddine et al. to detect mild cognitive impairment, a high-risk condition for Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
To set a working cutoff score for the referral to diagnostic examination, we evaluated 150 consecutive patients with complaints potentially related to dementia, using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
RAVLT was administered as part of a more extensive neuropsychological battery at baseline evaluation in 116 unselected patients referred by subjective memory complaints (SMC). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A survey was made of 274 non-institutionalized persons aged 70 and over living in Hobart. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Neuropsychiatric symptoms seen in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are not simply a consequence of neurodegeneration, but probably result from differential neurotransmitter alterations, which some patients are more at risk of than others. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We selected screening tests that met 2 criteria: 1) administration time of 10 minutes or less in studies including individuals with, and without, dementia; and 2) performance characteristics evaluated in at least 1 community or clinical sample of older adults. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite evidence that early identification of dementia is of growing policy and practice significance in the U.K., limited work has been done on evaluating screening measures for use in primary care. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Studies of high body mass index (BMI) and cognition in the elderly have shown conflicting results. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The authors report the incidence of dementia in a community-dwelling Brazilian population. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,656 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) has contributed to detecting cognitive impairment, yet few studies have evaluated its accuracy when used by general practitioners (GP) in an actual public-health setting. 3 key findings →
Participants: 317 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among a matched sample of 15,410,030 beneficiaries, accounting for both provider and patient characteristics, the incident dementia diagnosis rate was 0.11 percentage points lower for MA beneficiaries compared to TM beneficiaries attributed to the same PCP. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Non-core NfL and GFAP biomarkers are associated with both cross-sectional and longitudinal cognitive performance. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 334 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Although apolipoprotein E (ApoE) ε4 is a well-established risk factor for Alzheimer disease, its role in the development of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) remains uncertain. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Harmonized neuropsychological assessment for neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) is an urgent priority in clinics. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The combination of antiretroviral therapy (cART) and preventive measures has significantly enhanced the management of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants recognized the added value of DCAs, and multiple factors were identified as facilitators and barriers for their use. 1 key finding →
Participants: 14 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found moderate or good agreement between self- and RC-administered performance, with intraclass correlation ranging from 0.59 to 0.83. 4 key findings →
Participants: 46 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
10 of the 1,775 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 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.
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 →