27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Between March 1, 2016, and March 12, 2020, 383 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 383 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 57 articles were included in the review, including 3182 participants. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,182 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Well-designed and executed RCTs are needed to confirm our findings on stroke and to have more scientific evidence available for the other neurological diseases. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,335 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The use of ecologically oriented approaches with virtual reality (VR) depicting instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) is a promising approach for interventions on acquired brain injuries. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Participants in the experimental group had better overall subjective memory, subjective retrospective memory and global quality of life, with fewer depressive symptoms than those in the control group 3 months following the program. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our sample had a mean age of 66.8 (SD = 5.3) years, a mean HAM-D score of 19.4 (SD = 7.5), and a mean PHQ-9 score of 18.0 (SD = 6.3). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 28 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The findings of this cohort study suggest that smartphones could offer a feasible, reliable, valid, and scalable solution for remote evaluations of FTLD and may improve early detection. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 258 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Prior work has shown that the video component significantly contributes to quality and satisfaction of the visit.3 In addition to the technology itself, patients need to know what to expect for their telehealth appointments. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 5,000 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) aims to validate biomarkers for Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical trials. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 20,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Bilingualism has been linked to improved executive function and delayed onset of dementia, but it is unknown whether similar benefits can be obtained later in life through deliberate intervention. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 76 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results corroborate the positive effect of pb-CT and its maintenance primarily on memory in HE and MCI participants that did not seem to be potentiated by RT. 5 key findings →
Participants: 348 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Both verbal and visual computerized memory tests showed comparable diagnostic performance to the paper-and-pencil tests. 1 key finding →
Participants: 18,450 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It has been suggested that patients undergoing treatment with recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) may develop cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although computerized cognitive training (CCT) is an effective digital intervention for cognitive impairment, its dose-response relationship is understudied. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,709 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients in the experimental group showed a significant improvement in various neuropsychological domains due to the training, and these effects decreased after 12 months. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The rapidly increasing worldwide population of older adults, along with the increasing prevalence of cognitive impairment and dementia in this population, is a growing health-care problem. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A smartphone application collected 2 modalities of cognitive data, digital voice and screen-based behaviors, from the FHS (Framingham Heart Study) multigenerational Generation 2 (Gen 2) and Generation 3 (Gen 3) cohorts. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 455 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The slow progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) poses a challenge for the quantification of early disease-driven cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 152 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The CDR+NACC FTLD global score interacted with time on battery percentage such that participants with prodromal or symptomatic FTLD demonstrated less change in battery percentage throughout the day (a proxy for less smartphone use) than clinically normal participants (P<.001 in both cases). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 94 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The SmartPrompt is a smartphone-based reminder application informed by a neuropsychological model of functional disability. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive impairment is recognised as an important non-motor symptom in Parkinson's disease (PD) and there is a need for evidence-based non-pharmacological interventions that may prevent or slow cognitive decline in this patient group. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study aimed to investigate the association between a virtual reality (VR) intervention program and cognitive, brain and physical functions in high-risk older adults. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 68 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A systematic review to examine the efficacy of computer-based cognitive interventions for cognitively healthy older adults was conducted. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
All test batteries exhibited some of the strengths of computerized cognitive testing: standardization of administration and stimulus presentation, accurate measures of response latencies, automated comparison in real time with an individual's prior performance as well as with age-related norms, and efficiencies of staffing and cost. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Conventional neuropsychological assessments for Alzheimer's disease are burdensome and inaccurate at detecting mild cognitive impairment and predicting Alzheimer's disease risk. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 525 Evidence: moderate
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 →