27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The purpose of the study was to provide characterization of Mexican Americans who meet criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 3 key findings →
Participants: 633 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Greater lifetime stress predicted poorer later-life cognition, and, in a small sample of African Americans, faster declines in a key domain of episodic memory. 4 key findings →
Participants: 50 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Most older patients surviving AMI have measurable CIND. 2 key findings →
Participants: 772 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, the CDT may be as effective as the MMSE or CASI as a first-level dementia screen for clinical use in multiethnic, multilingual samples of older adults. 3 key findings →
Participants: 295 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study enrolled 184 middle-aged and older women (95 Non-Hispanic White and 89 Hispanic/Latino) who provided in-home hands-on care to an elderly relative with Alzheimer's disease or another form of dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 184 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings demonstrate that early life experiences influence the trajectory of cognitive aging. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher-order factors (e.g., emotional distress, subjective health), which reflect complex interactions between various aspects of an individual, were more important than narrowly defined factors (e.g., clinical and behavioral indicators) when evaluated concurrently to predict cognitive impairment and dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 9,979 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found that a larger share of Hispanic Medicare residents that are admitted to nursing homes have ADRD compared with African American and White beneficiaries. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,302,099 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
According to the National Institute on Aging (NIA), there are more than 70 associated genes or genetic areas associated with Alzheimer’s when 20 years ago, we knew of only four (Hodes, 2022). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 42 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CBSD revealed a framework for how economic hardship, especially low income and unemployment, reduces access to physical and mental healthcare, driving dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 234 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Studies examining associations between greenspace and Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (ADRD) outcomes are rapidly on the rise, yet no known literature reviews have summarized the racialized/ethnic group and geographic variation of those published studies. 1 key finding →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This analysis found that the mean brain age gap does not significantly differ between Quintile 5 and Quintiles 1‐4 (p≤0.45), however statistical power was low given very broad confidence intervals. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,052 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data from 17 107 individuals (321 Asian, 635 Black, 829 Hispanic, and 15 322 White) with MCI or dementia and amyloid PET were analyzed between April 2020 and January 2022. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,154 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The findings from the AHEAD Study screening process and longitudinal data from the LEARN Study are providing critical data to guide future prevention trial design. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The 2024 Lancet Commission Report on dementia prevention has identified 14 modifiable risk factors that account for approximately 45% of global dementia cases. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
By 2060, ADRD cases in China are projected to reach approximately 49.89 million, with the highest prevalence and economic burden concentrated in provinces such as Shandong, Sichuan, Jiangsu, Henan, and Guangdong. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher ARTS score was associated (all ps < 0.01) with incident MCI (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.29), dementia (HR = 1.33), and stroke (HR = 1.52) and with diastolic/systolic blood pressure, self-reported hypertension, claudication, congestive heart failure, smoking, and glomerular filtration rate in the combined sample. 5 key findings →
Participants: 707 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia prevalence exceeds 40% for individuals in advanced old age, but that figure is not informative about the lifetime risk of ever having dementia or the risk of having dementia for different durations. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Virtual data collection was highly feasible in both studies, successfully engaging participants in ADRD research, including those from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 500 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence of low vision in the Medicare population was 994/100,000 and increased significantly with age, Black (1,854/100,000) or Hispanic (2,862/100,000) race/ethnicity, female gender (1,181/100,000), and Medicaid eligibility (2,975/100,000). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We conducted a comprehensive screening of rare coding variants in an African American cohort to identify novel pathogenic mutations within the early-onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) genes (APP, PSEN1, and PSEN2) in this understudied population. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 1,156 Mexican American and 587 non-Hispanic White participants were included (mean age = 68 years, standard deviation = 10; 65% female). 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,156 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A heterogeneous community sample (n=371) of predominantly ethnic minority elderly assessed by standardized research protocol, 231 of whom met criteria for dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 2 key findings →
Participants: 371 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Algorithmic diagnoses provide a cost-effective way to conduct dementia research. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most frequent cause of dementia, where the abnormal accumulation of beta-amyloid (Aβ) and tau lead to neurodegeneration as well as loss of cognitive, behavioral, and functional abilities. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
9 of the 879 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 9. The same 9 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 27,380 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 →