30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
BackgroundNeighborhood disadvantage has been associated with reduced cognitive reserve, increased risk for cognitive impairment, and greater Alzheimer's disease (AD) neuropathology, with particularly pronounced effects among Black and Hispanic/Latino older adults. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Overall, our findings suggest that greater neighborhood disadvantage may influence select domains of memory, and that one’s self-reported loneliness may influence how this relationship manifests. 4 key findings →
Participants: 136 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Specifically, higher inflammation was associated with worse processing speed (B = -0.01; p < .05) and working memory (B = 8323.66; p < .1) only among those from more disadvantaged neighborhoods. 3 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Donanemab increased total healthcare costs ($300,689 vs. $178,121) and societal costs ($389,113 vs. $283,618) compared with standard care per capita, while improving health outcomes (4.38 vs. 4.01 QALYs) per capita. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Key barriers included limited digital literacy, resistance to technology and privacy concerns, as well as competing organisational priorities, and inadequate technological infrastructure. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants had a mean age of 55.1 years (SD = 14), were predominantly female, and primarily cared for a parent. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Palliative care should be introduced as a culturally tailored set of services to assist families in ways that align with their values and caregiving practices. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This multisite initiative demonstrated that structured PPI is feasible in LMICs when supported by cultural adaptation, PPI coordinator roles, and tailored training for contributors and researchers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We sought to identify patterns in occupational therapy (OT) and physical therapy (PT) home health care visits among people living with dementia (PLWD) by (1) level of function care partner report compared with administrative data, (2) race and ethnicity, and (3) level of socioeconomic resources. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Enrollment in an MA plan is associated with a higher probability of AWV uptake, particularly among vulnerable populations from racial and ethnic minorities, dual eligibility, and those diagnosed with ADRD. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
SSP is a flexible and predictive neighborhood‐level measure of health disparities compared to indices like the Gini coefficient. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADRD specialist and drug utilization is relatively low in both DS and non‐DS, with no significant R/E differences. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The model achieved and AUC of 0.72 [0.64, 0.81]. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Across the literature, it is evident that health inequalities currently exist and exacerbate the disparities in the care of BAME dementia patients. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that represents a growing challenge to global health, especially in aging populations. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Future research should leverage perspectives of former caregivers to assist with improving outcomes for Black caregivers, thereby promoting health equity. [ Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 51 (6), 30–37.] 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This Journal is not only a new publication but also the culmination of a shared vision and a timely response to one of the most significant demographic shifts in human history: the rapid aging of the South Asian population. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 6,911,104 patients (min=Idaho: 45,160; max=California: 2.46 million), we observed a substantial difference in overall diagnosed prevalence across states of residence: Oregon and Montana had the highest diagnosed prevalence (6.6% and 6.5%, respectively); New Mexico had the lowest (2.3%). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADRD mortality rates were slightly higher in rural areas compared to urban areas, with no significant differences between rural-adjacent and rural-nonadjacent counties in recent years. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From 2016 to 2022, Alzheimer’s disease mortality significantly increased among Black individuals (AAPC = 8.3%, 95% CI [2.6 to 16.0]; p < 0.05) and declined among White individuals (AAPC = −2.9%, 95% CI [−12.3 to 7.6] p < 0.05). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings highlight a persistent spatial mismatch between population needs and care infrastructure. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A food desert is a geographic area lacking spatial and socioeconomic access to healthy foods. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Overall health is significantly impacted by where one lives. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD), is a major cause of death among older adults in the United States. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite having an increased risk of developing dementia, individuals from minority ethnic communities are largely overlooked by research and dementia services and are less likely to receive timely diagnosis and appropriate support. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
10 of the 926 studies in this tag that have a study page, 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 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