Nine studies with a total of 44,004 participants met the inclusion criteria. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 44,004 Evidence: high
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.
MYB will be the largest internet-based trial to attempt to prevent cognitive decline and potentially dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Regions with early signs of elevated amyloid β uptake were used to form an early, focal composite and compared to a commonly used global composite, in a separate validation sample. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 279 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The treatment of ischaemic stroke with neuroprotective drugs has been unsuccessful, and whether these compounds can be used to reduce disability after recurrent stroke is unknown. 4 key findings →
Participants: 20,332 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study included 732 participants (median [IQR] age, 41 [34.0-48.0] years; 369 [50.4%] male; 64 [8.9%] Black or African American, 587 [81.3%] White, and 71 [9.8%] other races); 414 reported baseline FTS use and 318 did not. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 732 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 450 111 participants were included in the study (mean [SD] age, 51.1 [9.8] years; 70.8% women) and followed up during a median (IQR) time of 14.9 (4.1) years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 111 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Protection from these ADP factors may be important for aging without significant ADP. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 423 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This trial found no benefit of 24-month multidomain intervention with focus on improvement in lifestyle and vascular risk factors on the incidence of poststroke cognitive decline in comparison with standard stroke care. 1 key finding →
Participants: 101 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Forty-one studies were included. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 368 participants were included (median [IQR] age, 58 [50-65] years; 71% were female, 27% were Black, 6% were Hispanic, and 61% were White; median [IQR] BMI, 32.3 [28.5-37.1]). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 368 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
AS01-adjuvanted shingles (herpes zoster) vaccination is associated with a lower risk of dementia, but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 436,788 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene is the best established genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease in later life, with the ε4 allele conferring higher risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 9,496 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nutrition is a modifiable factor potentially related to aging. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 661 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
63/100
Enrollment began in March 2001 and ended in December 2004 when treatments were suspended because of concerns regarding cardiovascular safety of the treatments. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nutrition is an important modifiable risk factor that plays a role in the strategy to prevent or delay the onset of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
63/100
Some prior studies showed lower circulating BDNF in persons with Alzheimer disease (AD) compared with control participants; however, it remains uncertain whether reduced levels precede dementia onset. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 140 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The exact etiology of dementia is still unclear, but both genetic and lifestyle factors are thought to be key drivers of this complex disease. 1 key finding →
Participants: 6,352 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frailty is strongly associated with dementia risk and affects the risk attributable to genetic factors. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,762 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Folic acid supplements may sometimes therefore include vitamin B12 supplements with simultaneous administration of vitamin B12.Lesser degrees of folate inadequacy are associated with high blood levels of the amino acid homocysteine which has been linked with the risk of arterial disease, dementia and Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The past and ongoing increase in midlife obesity prevalence will contribute significantly to the future prevalence of dementia and public health measures to reduce midlife obesity are simultaneously primary prevention measures to reduce the risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Varicella-zoster virus (VZV) is a neurotropic virus that establishes lifelong latency in humans. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 2946 participants (mean [SD] age, 74.9 [4.6] years; 1751 [59.4] female; 637 Black [21.6%] and 2309 White [78.4%] individuals), 1947 participants (66.1%) had audiometric hearing loss, and 1097 (37.2%) had self-reported hearing loss. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,946 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Critical outcomes were rate of falls (number of falls per unit time) and number of fallers (risk of experiencing one or more falls). 5 key findings →
Participants: 104 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
63/100
Researchers analyzed population-based data and relative risks from existing meta-analyses to estimate the population-attributable risk of Alzheimer's disease worldwide, in the USA, Europe, and the UK for seven potentially modifiable risk factors.
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This meta-analysis highlights sleep management as a pivotal modifiable factor in reducing the risk of all-cause cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis 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 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 →