27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Circulating NfL and GFAP may, independently and jointly, provide useful clinical insight regarding dementia risk and prognosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,712 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our aim was to test the association of vascular risk factor exposure in midlife with progression of MRI markers of brain aging and measures of cognitive decline. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,352 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over 10 years of close clinical dementia surveillance in this cohort study, loneliness was associated with increased dementia risk; this tripled in adults whose baseline risk would otherwise be relatively low on the basis of age and genetic risk, representing a majority of the US population. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,308 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among participants in the Framingham Heart Study, the incidence of dementia has declined over the course of three decades. 3 key findings →
Participants: 5,205 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An increased plasma homocysteine level is a strong, independent risk factor for the development of dementia and Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,092 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Low physical activity is associated with a higher risk for dementia in older individuals, suggesting that a reduced risk of dementia and higher brain volumes may be additional health benefits of maintaining physical activity into old age. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,714 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This long-running Massachusetts study tracked dementia rates over more than 30 years and found that a given person's chance of developing dementia at a given age has been steadily falling since the late 1970s. The decline was seen mainly in people with at least a high school education. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 5,205 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The study encompassed 284 cases with dementia and 1080 controls. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Elevated blood pressure during midlife, persistence of elevated blood pressure into late life, and, among nonhypertensives, a steep decline in blood pressure during mid- to late life were associated with an increased dementia risk in a community-based cohort. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,440 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We estimated the remaining lifetime risks of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia from all causes, based on data from longitudinal population studies. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 198 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Diabetes mellitus did not increase the risk of incident AD in the Framingham cohort overall; however, DM may be a risk factor for AD in the absence of other known major AD risk factors. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,210 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Stroke increases a subject's risk of dementia as compared with age- and sex-matched controls. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 212 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The association between vascular risk factors and dementia varies with age, making generalizability of dementia risk prediction rules to individuals of different ages challenging. 4 key findings →
Participants: 4,899 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During the 17-year follow-up period, 164 participants developed dementia; 136 of these cases were AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 164 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed 234 cases of all-cause dementia over 10 years of follow-up. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,457 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings underscore the importance of blood pressure control in midlife to mitigate dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 229,976 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Selective survival of men with a healthier cardiovascular risk profile and hence lower propensity to dementia might partly explain the higher LTR of dementia/AD in women. 1 key finding →
Participants: 7,901 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The LTR of stroke in middle-aged adults is 1 in 6 or more, which is equal to or greater than the LTR of AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 4,897 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Artificially sweetened soft drink consumption was associated with a higher risk of stroke and dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,888 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We categorized CVH on the basis of the American Heart Association Ideal CVH Index and genetic risk through a genetic risk score (GRS) of common genetic variants and the APOE ε4 genotype in 1,211 Framingham Heart Study (FHS) offspring cohort participants. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Perivascular spaces (PVS) visible on MRI scans may represent key aspects in the pathophysiology of stroke and dementia, including cerebral small vessel disease and glymphatic dysfunction. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this large, population-based cohort, baseline and long-term average serum total cholesterol levels were not associated with the risk for incident AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,026 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The Petersen/Winblad criteria classified 34% of participants as having MCI while the Jak/Bondi criteria classified 24% as MCI. 3 key findings →
Participants: 58 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
On long-term follow-up (median 15 years; minimum-maximum, 0-20), participants developed cardiometabolic disease (hypertension [1255 events]; diabetes [381 events]), chronic kidney disease (529 events), dementia (235 events), cardiovascular disease (684 events) a 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) are MRI markers attributed to the most common cerebral angiopathies in the elderly and in patients with dementia: hypertensive and cerebral amyloid angiopathy. 4 key findings →
Participants: 85 Evidence: low
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 27,380 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.
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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 →