27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The systematic review and NMA includes 493 168 participants from 869 trials (adding 53 trials since October 2022) reporting data for 13 drug classes (63 drugs) and 26 outcomes of interest. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 168 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We identified fifty studies (N=1,548,754). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,548,754 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Six prospective cohort studies with seven datasets, including 484,994 participants and a follow-up of 3.5 to 13.0 years, were included. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 484,994 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
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
Lower baseline amyloid beta (Aβ)42/40 ratio and higher phosphorylated tau 181 (p-tau181), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and neurofilament light chain (NfL) were associated with an increased risk of MCI and dementia; GFAP was most strongly associated. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,467 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Fourteen cohorts including 726,900 participants were analyzed. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 726,900 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Study-level data from 14 studies, 2,310,330 individuals, and 102,174 dementia case patients were included. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,310,330 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
General baseline characteristics of the study population were mean (standard deviation) age, 58.1 (8.8) years; 47% women. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,087 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, blood pressure lowering with antihypertensive agents compared with control was significantly associated with a lower risk of incident dementia or cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 96,158 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings suggest that a hearing intervention might reduce cognitive change over 3 years in populations of older adults at increased risk for cognitive decline but not in populations at decreased risk for cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 858 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A 2-year multi-domain lifestyle intervention among older adults was effective in preventing cerebrovascular events and also total CVD events among those who had history of CVD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 631 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is consistent evidence supporting an association between AF and increased incidence of dementia in patients with stroke whereas there remains considerable uncertainty about any link in the broader population. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 46,637 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
As visual impairment, cataract, and diabetic retinopathy are associated with an increased likelihood of developing dementia, early diagnosis may help identify those at risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 37,705 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The interventions were positively perceived, with 72.0% finding the consultation informative and 69.2% considering the app useful. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 188 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
A total of 20 studies were included in the systematic review, and 17 provided data for the meta-analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 20 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Visually impaired individuals were more likely to develop incident dementia, with a progressively greater risk among those with worse visual acuity. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 117,187 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The AgeWell.de intervention reduced dementia risk. 1 key finding →
Participants: 461 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The current study investigated several factors that might increase the risk of mortality in elderly patients with hip fracture. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 223,875 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Presence and severity of WMH are associated with substantially increased risk of dementia, functional impairment, stroke recurrence, and mortality after ischemic stroke. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 104 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In a large international cardiovascular outcome trial in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiorenal disease, linagliptin did not modulate cognitive decline over 2.5 years. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,545 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Hearing loss is one of the top contributors to years lived with disability and is a risk factor for dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 723,266 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Greater adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with a significant improvement in health status, as seen by a significant reduction in overall mortality (9%), mortality from cardiovascular diseases (9%), incidence of or mortality from cancer (6%), and incidence of Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease (13%). 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 574,299 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 33,995 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
9 of the 3,247 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 9. The same 9 appear here every time.
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 →