31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In this study of adults with subjective memory impairment, a 6-month program of physical activity provided a modest improvement in cognition over an 18-month follow-up period. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 170 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A moderate to high intensity aerobic and strength exercise training programme does not slow cognitive impairment in people with mild to moderate dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 494 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00056225. 1 key finding →
Participants: 340 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Six months of high-intensity aerobic exercise had sex-specific effects on cognition, glucose metabolism, and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and trophic activity despite comparable gains in cardiorespiratory fitness and body fat reduction. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Exercise training for patients with Alzheimer disease combined with teaching caregivers how to manage behavioral problems may help decrease the frailty and behavioral impairment that are often prevalent in patients with Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An intensive and long-term exercise program had beneficial effects on the physical functioning of patients with AD without increasing the total costs of health and social services or causing any significant adverse effects. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 210 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among older persons with AMD, oral supplementation with LCPUFAs or lutein/zeaxanthin had no statistically significant effect on cognitive function. 5 key findings →
Participants: 89 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 157 participants initially assessed, 137 were enrolled in the Age-Well clinical trial, and 127 were analyzed in this study. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 157 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One hundred seventy-four patients fulfilled the trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 32 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Oxidative stress, inflammation, and increased cholesterol levels are all mechanisms that have been associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The non-linear function indicates that a higher dose is not necessarily better in multidomain interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 749 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sleep deprivation, or prolonged wakefulness, interferes with a physiological morning decrease in Aβ42. 1 key finding →
Participants: 26 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In male physicians aged 65 years or older, long-term use of a daily multivitamin did not provide cognitive benefits. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One-hundred and twenty participants, with a mean (range) of 1.2 (1-4) strokes, a mean (SD) of 66.5 (53.8) months since the most recent stroke, mean (SD) baseline age of 70 (8) years, mean (SD) baseline ADAS-Cog-Plus of 0.22 (0.81), and 74 (62%) male participants, were randomized to EX (34 participants), ENRICH (34 participants), or BAT (52 participants). 3 key findings →
Participants: 34 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Low dose ω3-PUFA supplementation, either alone or in combination with a multidomain lifestyle intervention comprising physical activity counselling, had no significant effects on muscle strength over 3 years in elderly people. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,679 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Baseline assessments were conducted on 128 participants. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 125 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 135 older adults (mean age = 69.3 years; women = 61.5%), no associations were found within AD-signature regions (all p > 0.25). 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There was a significant interaction (P = 0.024) between B vitamin treatment and plasma combined ω-3 fatty acids (eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid) on brain atrophy rates. 5 key findings →
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study failed to find a beneficial effect of exogenous melatonin, consistent with a number of other studies. 2 key findings →
Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Regular, long-term, customized HE improved the executive function of community-dwelling older people with memory disorders, but the effects were mild and were not observed in other domains of cognition. 3 key findings →
Participants: 210 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Additionally, our results indicate that AD subjects carrying APOE ε4 are more responsive to the neuroprotective effects of physical activity. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Further investigations are needed, especially trials providing stronger interventions (such as exercise training and a controlled diet) and also embracing the sensorial domain of IC. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,445 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this multicenter randomized clinical trial among older adults with family history of dementia and/or self-reported subjective cognitive decline, exercise, IRVR, or both did not result in statistically significant differences in improvements in cognitive function over 24 months. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,290 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Published studies suggest that greater adherence to Mediterranean diet is associated with slower cognitive decline and lower risk of developing Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We found some evidence that n-3 PUFAs might be beneficial for the maintenance of executive functioning in older adults at risk of dementia with low omega-3 index, but this exploratory finding requires further confirmation. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 183 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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