This study found no evidence of a neuroprotective effect of physical activity. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 329 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Frequent consumption of fruits and vegetables, fish, and omega-3 rich oils may decrease the risk of dementia and Alzheimer disease, especially among ApoE epsilon 4 noncarriers. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,085 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
72/100
In this cohort of older adults, increased numbers of optimal cardiovascular health metrics and a higher cardiovascular health score were associated with a lower risk of dementia and lower rates of cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,626 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher adherence to a Mediterranean diet was associated with slower MMSE cognitive decline but not consistently with other cognitive tests. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 99 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fasting lipid fractions (triglycerides [TGs], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], total cholesterol [TC]) were studied as continuous variables, and results are reported per SD increase of each lipid fraction. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 9,294 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed a complex series of relationships between social-environment variables and cognitive decline and dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,854 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study is based on a population-based cohort of 7,839 subjects over 65 years with 7 years of follow-up. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 7,839 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Contrary to early case-control studies that suggested smoking protects against Alzheimer disease (AD), recent prospective studies have shown that elderly who smoke may be at increased risk for dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 17,610 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Compared with men, women have an increased risk for AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Conventionally defined MCI has reasonable predictive value and specificity for AD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,265 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Out of 3127 abstracts, 291 were included in the review. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
61/100
This observational study provides further evidence that lipid-lowering agents are associated with decreased risk of dementia, whereas hyperlipidemia is associated with increased odds for non-Alzheimer-disease-type dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 9,294 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The observed relation between high triglycerides, diabetes, and vascular dementia emphasizes the need for detection and treatment of vascular risk factors in older individuals in order to prevent the likelihood of clinical dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although many studies have found a cross-sectional relation between depression and dementia or depressive symptomatology and cognitive functioning, the direction of the association is still unknown. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,600 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
To analyze the longitudinal relationships between vision loss and the risk of dementia in the first 2 years, from 2 to 4 years and beyond 4 years after inclusion and to determine the roles of depressive symptomatology and engagement in cognitively stimulating activities in these associations. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
56/100
The psychostimulant properties of caffeine appear to reduce cognitive decline in women without dementia, especially at higher ages. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
LIBRA might be a useful tool to identify individuals for primary prevention interventions of dementia in midlife, and maybe in late life, but not in the oldest-old. 2 key findings →
Participants: 3,256 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
It has been postulated that oxidative stress may play a key role in dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,367 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
53/100
Alcoholism is a possible cause of dementia, mainly through associated nutritional deficiencies and, rarely, through acute direct toxicity. 1 key finding →
Participants: 3,777 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Elderly people taking anticholinergic drugs were at increased risk for cognitive decline and dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The authors examined the association of incident dementia and subtypes with age, sex, and geographic area in Europe. 5 key findings →
Participants: 835 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The authors investigated the hypothesis that exposure to pesticides could be related to central nervous system disorders in a prospective cohort study of 1,507 French elderly (1992-1998). 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our study confirms the strong link between hearing status and the risk of disability, dementia, and depression. 4 key findings →
Participants: 3,777 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Ninety-seven men (incidence rate: 14.4/1,000) and 183 women (Incidence rate: 19.0/1,000) developed dementia during 8 years of follow-up. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events