Depression was the most common psychiatric diagnosis in all groups. 2 key findings →
Participants: 69 Evidence: low
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.
56/100
Patients with dementia were older and had higher rates of hypertension, coronary artery disease, renal failure, heart failure, and prior strokes. 5 key findings →
Participants: 37,025 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During follow-up ranging from 1.0 to 22.9 years, 75 patients (29.88%) converted to AD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 75 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This is because of the ambiguity surrounding the terminology used to characterize reversible dementia—the variation in the population being studied, or the existence of subclinical instances that are difficult to diagnose.[3] By and large however, the proportion of reversible dementias compared to the irreversible dementias is very low. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A multivariate analysis was also performed to predict specific risk factors associated with male and female EOAD and LOAD patients. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,212 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Declining body mass index (BMI) is associated with increased risk of incident Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 151 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Up-to-date, strictly cross-nationally comparable and nationally representative data on cognitive health are essential for our understanding of the dementia-related challenges in healthcare, to detect shortcomings in healthcare systems and to design effective prevention strategies. 1 key finding →
Participants: 47,773 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neurogenic orthostatic hypotension (nOH) is common in patients with neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease, multiple system atrophy, pure autonomic failure, dementia with Lewy bodies, and peripheral neuropathies including amyloid or diabetic neuropathy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has long been recognized to be a risk factor for dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
The adverse effects of obesity and hypertension in men are independent and cumulative with respect to cognitive deficit. 1 key finding →
Participants: 551 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Factor analysis showed four robust and meaningful symptom clusters: factor 1-stereotypic and eating behaviour; factor 2-executive dysfunction and self care; factor 3-mood changes; factor 4-loss of social awareness. 4 key findings →
Participants: 33 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Dementia risk was significantly higher in patients with epilepsy compared with that of controls (IRR: 3.65; 95% CI: 3.14-4.24), especially within the first 2 years post-diagnosis (aHR: 5.42; 95% CI: 4.30-6.83), peaking between 8 and 10 years (aHR: 8.25; 95% CI: 3.15-21.5). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,740 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
On average, the risk of dementia seems to increase with the number of episodes in depressive and bipolar affective disorders. 2 key findings →
Participants: 18,726 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundIndividuals with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of developing both vascular and Alzheimer's dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 128 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia-associated weight loss begins before the onset of the clinical syndrome and accelerates by the time of diagnosis. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study examined the validity of the four standard psychological paradigms that have been operationally defined within the CogState brief computerized cognitive assessment battery. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This longitudinal evidence supports a link between the ALPS-I and cognitive degeneration. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Also, there are no licensed treatments specifically for VD.[3] What sets VD apart from other dementias are the following factors: The etiology of VD is clearly associated with brain tissue loss and dysfunction secondary to vascular pathophysiology in which hypertension seems to be the main reason.[4] While the exact cellular mechanisms are still not clear, it does imply that VD may potentially be largely preventable through better cardiovascular-metabolic risk modification. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Subjective memory complaints (SMCs) are common in older people and are often thought to indicate cognitive impairment. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
47/100
Debate exists regarding differences in the prevalence of Alzheimer disease (AD) in African Americans and Hispanics in the United States, with some evidence suggesting that the prevalence of AD may be considerably higher in these groups than in non-Hispanic whites. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Study objectives We conducted the present study to determine whether psychiatric disorders are commonly associated with sleep apnea in Veterans Health Administration beneficiaries. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We used cross-sectional data from the NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) from 1999 to 2018 linked to National Death Index records. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diabetes is a global health concern associated with complications such as cognitive decline and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the fully adjusted model, the odds ratio (OR) for persistent loneliness was 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10, 1.95). 5 key findings →
Participants: 9,389 Evidence: low
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. 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
- Randomized / 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
- Multicenter 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