51/100
Cancer is a long-term illness that involves an imbalance in cellular and immune functions. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The study population consisted of 16,981 individuals (mean age: 62.4, 51.6% female, 68.7% non-Hispanic White, 15.5% in rural areas). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 16,981 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
51/100
The national combined PAF for 11 modifiable risk factors was 39.6 % (95 % CI: 20.8-55.9). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 86,494 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The combinations that were both highly prevalent and had the most detrimental effect on global cognition were: hearing loss and physical inactivity for the dyad (mean difference in change score = -0.07 SD; 95 % CI: -0.09 to -0.06; p < 0.001; effect size = -0.28), hearing loss, physical inactivity, and hypertension for the triad (mean difference in change score = -0.07; 95 % CI: -0.09 to -0.06; p < 0.001; effect size = -0.28), and hearing loss, physical inactivity, hypertension, and sleep disturbance for the tetrad (mean difference in change score = -0.05; 95 % CI: -0.07 to -0.03; p < 0.001; effect size = -0.20). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 30,097 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sarcopenia and its components were associated with baseline MMSE and MMSE changes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,146 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Analyses demonstrated that criteria regarding cardiovascular disease, pulmonary disease, hearing impairment, and sedentary lifestyle were associated with relatively high participant diversity, while gastro-intestinal/liver disease, motivation to participate, and language proficiency criteria were associated with relatively little diversity. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease has provided significant understanding of the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Use of vitamin E and vitamin C supplements in combination is associated with reduced prevalence and incidence of AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Women may expect to spend more than a third of their lives after menopause. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
White matter hyperintensities contribute to the presentation of AD and, in the context of significant amyloid deposition, may provide a second hit necessary for the clinical manifestation of the disease. 3 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multiple factors affect cognitive health, such as age-related changes in the brain, injuries, mood disorders, substance abuse, and diseases. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A primary goal of research in cognitive impairment and dementia is to understand how some individuals retain sufficient cognitive function for a fulfilling life while many others are robbed of their independence, sometimes their essence, in the last years and decades of life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Clinical Alzheimer's disease (AD) trials currently face a critical shortfall of thousands of eligible participants, which inflates the duration and cost of the clinical study as well as threatens the scientific merit of promising clinical interventions. 2 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Three trajectory classes were identified: stable, slow decliners, and fast decliners. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
When risk factors were evaluated independently, we found less early-life education, mid-life hearing loss and diabetes, and late-life social isolation and visual loss associated with increased odds for dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,526 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Education, smoking, diabetes, depression, physical activity and social isolation were associated with a 1.13-1.55 times increased risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The concept of cognitive reserve (CR) suggests that innate intelligence or aspects of life experience like educational or occupational attainments may supply reserve, in the form of a set of skills or repertoires that allows some people to cope with progressing Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology better than others. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Purpose of the study There is a global imperative to increase awareness of the emerging evidence on physical activity (PA) among older adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Physical activity improves overall health and reduces the risk of many negative health outcomes and may be effective in improving cognition, independent functioning, and psychological health in older adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive impairment can be influenced by a number of factors. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Physical activity reduces the risk of cognitive impairment, mainly vascular dementia, in older people living independently. 1 key finding →
Participants: 90 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hearing loss is a modifiable risk factor for dementia in older adults. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
49/100
Abnormal deposition and intercellular propagation of α-synuclein plays a central role in the pathogenesis of disorders such as Parkinson's Disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were observable geographic variations in education (range 13.4-16.2 years, Figure 1), age (range 66.7-72.4 years) and severable modifiable risk factors for dementia across Tasmania, Australia. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 8,891 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
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.
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 30,180 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 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), 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 →