Participants with more FTUs were found to have a slower biological ageing process. 5 key findings →
Participants: 22,900 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Of 2,218 participants, 237 (11%) developed dementia in the period 1992/3 to 2015/6. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,218 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At least 45% of dementia and 60% of stroke cases are due to modifiable risk factors and could in part be prevented through healthy behavior. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,478 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 8994 and 14 720 participants were involved in the change-to-change analyses and change-to-dementia analyses, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 720 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
MEDAS-R was positively associated with better MMSE performance (p = 0.043) and showed a borderline association with the MoCA (p = 0.051), but not with the ACE-R score (p = 0.356). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 75 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 0.279). No adverse events were reported. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 656 deaths, 1585 incidents of CVD and 165 dementia diagnoses during 17.2 years of follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 9,584 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive decline and dementia have a deep impact on the health and quality of life of older subjects and their caregivers. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Stronger adherence to the Mediterranean diet may reduce the rate of cognitive decline among black, but not white older adults. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study found no evidence that major lifestyle factors, aside from smoking, or sleep duration influence the risk of dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 3,755 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age and higher baseline BMI, independent of gender, and other confounding factors, are risk factors for cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Following a Mediterranean diet high in plant-based foods and fish, low in meat and dairy foods, and with moderate alcohol intake has been shown to promote healthy aging. 1 key finding →
Participants: 832 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Lateralization of function is an important organization of the human brain. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In recent years, there has been a strong interest in physical activity as a primary behavioural prevention strategy against cognitive decline. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
At baseline, subjects with normal vs. impaired cognition show no notable difference in microbiome diversity but several unique microbial signatures are detected in subjects with mild cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Idiopathic rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behaviour disorder (IRBD) manifests as unpleasant dreams and vigorous behaviours during REM sleep that can result in injuries. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Currently, insufficient evidence exists to draw firm conclusions on the association of any modifiable factors with risk of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) affects approximately 35 million people worldwide. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Changing instructions while maintaining the same cognitive and motor tasks on WWT in older adults result in task prioritization effects. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 189 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Significant interactions were found between APOE ε4 status and mindfulness and social engagement on cognitive reserve, indicating stronger associations for APOE ε4 carriers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 157 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Aging is associated with decline in white matter (WM) microstructure, decreased cognitive functioning, and increased risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
long baseline nighttime and 24-h sleep durations (≥9 h) as well as being persistent or becoming long sleepers during follow-up were associated with dementia incidence. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of the 17,668 respondents, 8,396 (47.5%) were men. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
55/100
A total of 260 AD deaths occurred during a median follow-up of 9.8 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 27,773 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The mean age of the participants was 70 years, and 55% were male. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
10 of the 1,888 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.
- Nutrient intake and dietary changes during a 2-year multi-domain lifestyle intervention among older adults: secondary analysis of the Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER) randomised controlled trial
- Virgin olive oil supplementation and long-term cognition: the PREDIMED-NAVARRA randomized, trial
- A fundamental conflict of care: Nurses' accounts of balancing patients' sleep with taking vital sign observations at night
- Community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly. Clinical and nutritional aspects
- Midlife coffee and tea drinking and the risk of late-life dementia: a population-based CAIDE study
- Computerized and virtual reality cognitive training for individuals at high risk of cognitive decline: systematic review of the literature
- Promising strategies for the prevention of dementia
- Effects of Physical Exercise on Health and Well-Being of Individuals Living With a Dementia in Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review
- Mediterranean diet and cognitive decline over time in an elderly Mediterranean population
- Dietary salt promotes cognitive impairment through tau phosphorylation
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. Show only studies that are free to read
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
- Randomised / 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
- Multi-centre 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 28,580 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.
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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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.
1,034 records (3.6% 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 →