Systemic racism leads to racial/ethnic residential segregation, which can result in health inequities. 3 key findings →
Participants: 4,616 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
32,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
57/100
Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) may be an early indicator of Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD), yet its association with plasma biomarkers remains unclear among middle-aged and older adults (aged 50-86 years). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,712 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In cognitively unimpaired (CU) adults at baseline, the risk for progression to dementia increased for every decile increase in the ADI state ranking (hazard ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval (1.01-1.11), P = .01). 5 key findings →
Participants: 4,699 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
(n = 2,392) had a mean age of 74.4 years, 60.4% were female, and 17.1% were of self-reported Black race. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,392 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
On average, participants were aged 63 years and had 16 years of education. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 13,145 individuals with risk factor data between 2015 and 2018 (51.1% aged 18-44, 31.0% aged 45-64, and 17.9% aged ≥65 years; 51.5% female after survey-weighting). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 13,145 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Prior studies have analyzed the burden of cognitive impairment, but often use potentially biased prevalence-based methods or measure only years lived with impairment, without estimating other relevant metrics. 3 key findings →
Participants: 29,304 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
Relative to white caregivers, blacks more often provided in excess of 40 hr of care per week (54.3% vs 38.6%) and more often cared for an older adult with dementia (27.1% vs 20.7%) who was living below the federal poverty line (31.7% vs 11.9%) or was Medicaid-eligible (42.2% vs 11.8%). 1 key finding →
Participants: 992 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Across Latin American and Caribbean countries (LACs), the fight against dementia faces pressing challenges, such as heterogeneity, diversity, political instability, and socioeconomic disparities. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
This analysis combining data from two health systems shows that area deprivation is an independent risk factor for cognitive dysfunction in older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,186 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Attenuation of racial inequalities in older age can be extended to cognitive outcomes, which probably reflects selective survival. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,875 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Across all domains, 14 constructs influenced development and implementation. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among non-Latino Whites, ADI was associated with dementia incidence (most vs. least disadvantaged ADI quintile HR = 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02-1.15). 4 key findings →
Participants: 18,103 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The rural setting presented unique challenges including: low literacy rates (60.1% of participants had no schooling), diverse language use (primarily Giriama and Swahili), limited infrastructure (e.g., 44.8% of households had electricity), restrictive cultural norms that influenced data collection (e.g., in-home interviews were often conducted outdoors with destructions). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 202 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The rising age of the global population has made Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) a critical public health problem, with significant health-related disparities observed between rural and urban areas. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study presents findings from IDEA Café, for older adults aged 50 and older living with early dementia, dementia, Alzheimer’s Disease or cognitive impairment (ED/CI) with no informal caregiver or care partner. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Demographic and clinical factors impact PD survival. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research on racial differences in Alzheimer disease (AD) dementia has increased in recent years. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black Americans are disproportionately affected by dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is emerging evidence that obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a risk factor for preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While a growing body of evidence points to potentially modifiable individual risk factors for dementia, the built and social environments in which people develop and navigate cognitive decline are largely overlooked. 2 key findings →
Participants: 21,151 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
55/100
No large-scale characterizations of neurofilament light chain (NfL) have been conducted in diverse populations. 1 key finding →
Participants: 890 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We examined the association of type 2 diabetes mellitus to function in different cognitive systems in older black and white persons. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,437 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
However, most people with dementia live in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), where dementia risk prediction research is almost non-existent and the ability of current models to predict dementia is unknown. 4 key findings →
Participants: 143 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Increasing neighborhood disadvantage was associated with increased risk of EHR-documented dementia diagnosis or dementia-related death (most vs. least disadvantaged ADI quintile HR = 1.76, 95% confidence interval = 1.69-1.84) after adjusting for age and sex. 4 key findings →
Participants: 253,421 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Where “Free full text” comes from
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.
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
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.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomized / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multicenter collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
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 32,180 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.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 32,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66.5% of the library) and OpenAlex (15.8%), 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.
1,045 records (3.2% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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
Last updated