TBI patients' brains were estimated to be older than their chronological age. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Delayed discharge is associated with higher hospital costs and complication rates especially nosocomial infections. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Medicare beneficiaries with ADRD were at a higher risk of PAHs for certain uncontrolled comorbidities and incurred higher Medicare expenditures compared with matched controls without dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A history of previous exposure to surgery under GA might be associated with an increased risk of dementia, particularly in subjects who have undergone repeated exposure to GA. 2 key findings →
Participants: 21,380 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
After taking into consideration a possible protopathic bias in the 2 years preceding the AD diagnosis date, benzodiazepine use was not associated with an increased risk of developing AD. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The authors found a relatively high incidence of hallucinations and delusions in patients diagnosed with probable AD and suggest that specific neurologic signs, cognitive abilities, and accelerated decline may be predictive markers for their occurrence. 5 key findings →
Participants: 329 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Rare variants should only be investigated in users with a family history of early-onset dementia in a first degree relative. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the 18,013 participants with complete data for analysis, 516 (2.86%) exhibited cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 27,768 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hypertensive pregnancy disorders are associated with worse performance on tests of processing speed and smaller brain volumes decades later. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,279 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our data suggest that some degree of blood-brain barrier dysfunction is common in older people and that this may be related to clinical dementia risk, additional to standard MRI biomarkers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 126 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
Dementia, particularly Alzheimer's disease (AD), presents a growing global health challenge characterized by cognitive decline, behavioral changes, and loss of independence. 1 key finding →
Participants: 2,878 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified 471 proteins with significant interaction effects between T2D and dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,920 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Lower SES and education were the strongest predictors of increased behavioral risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,730 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
The restricted use of BDZRs may contribute to dementia prevention in the elderly. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher-order factors (e.g., emotional distress, subjective health), which reflect complex interactions between various aspects of an individual, were more important than narrowly defined factors (e.g., clinical and behavioral indicators) when evaluated concurrently to predict cognitive impairment and dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 9,979 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After adjusting for sex, years of education, smoking status, diabetes, hypertension, apolipoprotein E ε4 carriership, and hearing rehabilitation (defined as hearing aid or cochlear implant use), neither PTA (hazard ratio [HR] per 10-decibels hearing level increase of 0·99 (95% CI 0·89-1·12; p=0·91) nor WRS (HR per 10% decrease of 0·98, 95% CI 0·89-1 ·07; p=0·65) was significantly associated with the development of dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Asthma, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis were significantly associated with increased risk of all-cause dementia and subtypes, with dose-effect relationships with the severity of allergic diseases. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The authors identified several factors, including receipt of mechanical ventilation, which were significantly associated with increased long-term mortality for survivors of severe sepsis. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,727 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) are highly prevalent conditions, and prior efforts to develop predictive models have relied on demographic and clinical risk factors using traditional logistical regression methods. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Occupational noise exposure accounts for approximately 16% of all disabling hearing losses, but the true value and societal costs may be grossly underestimated because current regulations only identify hearing impairments in the workplace if exposures result in audiometric threshold shifts within a limited frequency region. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The findings of this study suggest that predictive modeling could inform patients and clinicians about ASCVD at risk for dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 29,561 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The concomitant decline in stroke and dementia incidence rates may depict how successful stroke prevention has targeted shared risk factors of both conditions, especially at advanced ages where such risk factors are highly prevalent. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To estimate dementia incidence rates using Australian administrative datasets and compare the characteristics of people identified with dementia across different datasets. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We identified three major methodological weaknesses: (1) over-reliance on one data source, (2) poor verification of statistical assumptions of Cox and logistic regression, and (3) lack of validation. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence of dementia is growing worldwide due to the fast ageing of the population. 5 key findings →
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
- 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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,040 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 965 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