In this large study of older women, we observed no association of the Mediterranean diet with cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In this large study of older women, we observed no association of the Mediterranean diet with cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive decline is a rapidly increasing public health concern. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Study objectives To investigate the effect of an eight-week, home-based, personalized, computerized cognitive training program on sleep quality and cognitive performance among older adults with insomnia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
CCT was most effective in cognitive rehabilitation, particularly in the subdomain of memory. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We demonstrated the higher short-term improvement of cognitive functions scores in individuals of the MedDiet plus low dose of extravirgin olive oil rather than MedDiet alone. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In older adults with multiple dementia risk factors, group-based CCT is a safe and effective intervention for enhancing overall cognition, memory and processing speed. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 80 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, 68 studies were included in the meta-analyses. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Aging is associated with cognitive declines leading to mild cognitive impairments or Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This population-based study in community-dwellers aged 70 years or over suggested that multidomain intervention and n3 PUFA supplementation have not significant effects on cognitive function change in frail older adults with memory complaints. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These studies show that remote physical activity monitoring is feasible in neurological diseases, including in people with moderate to severe neurological disability. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, further research is needed with studies using larger sample sizes, standardized measurement outcomes, and longer follow-up periods, to inform evidence-based recommendations. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cardiovascular activity has been shown to be positively associated with gray and white matter volume of, amongst others, frontal and temporal brain regions in older adults. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
An increasing number of cardiometabolic diseases was dose-dependently associated with the decline in cognitive function score (one disease, β=-0·15 [95% CI -0·17 to -0·13]; two diseases, β=-0·37 [-0·40 to -0·34]; three diseases, β=-0·57 [-0·64 to -0·50]), with comorbid diabetes and stroke (β=-0·23 [-0·29 to -0·17]) contributing most strongly to cardiometabolic disease-associated cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 147 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
Dementia is a major contributor to dependence and disability in older people, with aging societies characterized by growing numbers of people living with the condition. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Modifiable risk factors identified in this study, especially those with high-level evidence, should be considered in dementia prevention. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These data suggest that apoJ may have potential in the context of use (COU) of AD diagnostics, I-309 may be specifically useful in the COU of identifying individuals at greatest risk for progressing toward AD. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 14 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Numerous studies have found associations between characteristics of urban environments and risk factors for dementia and cognitive decline, such as physical inactivity and obesity. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,800 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results suggest that a longitudinal digital biomarker differentiates between controls and patients with MCI in a very cost-effective and noninvasive way and hence may be very useful for identifying patients with very early AD who can benefit from clinical trials and new, disease-modifying therapies. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using nearly 8,000 British civil servants followed for up to 25 years (the Whitehall II study), this study found that people who slept 6 hours or less per night in their 50s and 60s had a higher later risk of dementia than those sleeping about 7 hours, even after accounting for other health and social factors. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 7,959 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This unusually long 28-year study found no evidence that being physically active in midlife protects against dementia later in life. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 10,308 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
After a median follow-up of 6.3 years, 678 individuals were diagnosed with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 84,854 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the cohort analyses, 891 incident dementia cases were identified over 166,762 person-years. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 207,981 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A higher level of total daily physical activity is associated with a reduced risk of AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 71 Evidence: moderate
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
10 of the 1,965 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 29,780 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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%), 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 (3.5% 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 →