27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Effective, scalable dementia prevention interventions are needed to address modifiable risk factors given global burden of dementia and challenges in developing disease-modifying treatments. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 6,104 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Initially, healthy older adults randomized to speed of processing cognitive training had a 29% reduction in their risk of dementia after 10 years of follow-up compared to the untreated control group. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,802 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a pathology with increasing prevalence in the context of a more long-lived society and it is the first cause of dementia in western countries. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 12,458 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
An 18-month multimodal intervention for older adults at risk of dementia could improve their cognitive function. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 203 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data collection and analysis We initially screened search results using a 'crowdsourcing' method in which members of Cochrane's citizen science platform identify RCTs. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 400 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The multidomain intervention showed no efficacy in preventing cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Participants: 531 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Adults aged 65+ are at highest risk for severe COVID-19 outcomes, and prior to the distribution of vaccines in the U.S., were strongly advised to quarantine at home to reduce risk of infection. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 156 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Current pharmacologic therapies are for symptomatic AD patients, whereas nonpharmacologic training is administrable before symptom onset. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 125 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Screening commenced in July 2022. Currently, 1,965 participants have been randomized into lifestyle intervention (n = 772) and control groups (n = 1,193). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 772 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The included studies (n=15) assessed change in cognition in response to a multidomain lifestyle intervention. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia prevalence is a global public health concern. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Transferring a lifestyle intervention from a trial-setting to real life requires knowledge about the factors that influence effective implementation. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 27 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results obtained will provide information on the applicability of these multidomain intervention programs to at-risk elderly people. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 150 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We investigated the effect of a multidomain lifestyle intervention on the risk of dementia estimated using the validated CAIDE risk score (post-hoc analysis). 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The FINGER MRI exploratory sub-study did not show significant differences between the intervention and control groups on changes in regional brain volumes, regional cortical thicknesses, or WML volume after 2 years in at-risk elderly without substantial impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 132 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Adherence to the MeDi diet may reduce the risk of MCI and AD. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Mediterranean diet (MD) has shown to reduce the occurrence of several chronic diseases. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 16,160 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In a large dementia prevention trial with 6-year follow-up, dropout was associated with older age, poorer cognitive function, symptoms of depression, and disability at baseline. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,994 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recruitment of 2600 older people (≥65 years) at increased risk of cardiovascular disease will take place in the Netherlands, Finland and France. 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Outcomes from this trial support the conduct of a larger and longer trial with this participant group. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 57 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Computerized cognitive training significantly improved global cognitive function, which was supported by the improved brain plasticity. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advancing age increases the risk for diseases and health concerns like cognitive decline, constituting a major public health challenge. 1 key finding →
Participants: 631 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings indicate that a 4-week simultaneous memory training and aerobic exercise program is sufficient to improve memory, attention, and reasoning abilities in older adults. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The heterogeneous and multi-factorial nature of dementia requires the consideration of all health aspects when predicting the risk of its development and planning strategies for its prevention. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive training involving speed of cognitive processing has the potential to delay the diagnosis of ADRD. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,021 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 (3.7% 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 →