Receiving two types of vaccinations versus one type was associated with lower dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 80,070 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Receiving two types of vaccinations versus one type was associated with lower dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 80,070 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The pooled trial included 88,381 participants who received prescriptions for GLP-1 agonists (n = 12,351), DPP-4 inhibitors (n = 43,850), or sulfonylureas (n = 32,216) at baseline and were followed for an average of 4.3 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 12,351 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Growing evidence has linked long-term fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) exposure to neurological disorders. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Blood-based biomarkers of AD/ADRD are influenced by common demographic and clinical characteristics. 2 key findings →
Participants: 779 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This Dutch cohort study compared dementia rates in two groups of older adults enrolled ten years apart. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 7,496 Evidence: preliminary
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals with cannabis use severe enough to require hospital-based care were at increased risk of a new dementia diagnosis compared with those with all-cause hospital-based care or the general population. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 6,086,794 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall age and sex standardized incidence decreased between 2015 and 2021 from 3.5% to 2.8%. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Given the inconsistent evidence regarding hearing aid use and reduced dementia risk, this study evaluates whether hearing aid use, particularly effective use, is associated with lower probable dementia risk among hearing-impaired older adults. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 61,089 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APPLE-Tree has a high probability of being cost-effective for a 1-point NTB gain, a difference previously associated with a three-fold reduction in 5-year dementia risk. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Comparison of probands with their unaffected spouses yielded odds ratios for AD of 9.9 (95% CI, 6.5 to 15.1) for head injury with loss of consciousness and 3.1 (2.3 to 4.0) for head injury without loss of consciousness. 3 key findings →
Participants: 2,233 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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
In this longitudinal study, impaired acute insulin response at midlife was associated with an increased risk of Alzheimer disease (AD) up to 35 years later suggesting a causal link between insulin metabolism and the pathogenesis of AD. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,322 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
To evaluate reverse causation, we assessed whether a polygenic risk score for AD is associated with HGS. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During 21 046 person-years of follow-up (median follow-up, 6.3 years), 199 women developed dementia, including 159 who developed AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,601 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study suggests that initiation of a low dose of antihypertensive treatment does not significantly increase the risk of OH in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 255 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The epidemiology of Parkinson's disease shows marked variations in time, geography, ethnicity, age, and sex. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Inclusion and exclusion criteria were met in 303 patients, and 25 (8.3%) presented to the ED with delirium. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 303 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The CAIDE dementia and Framingham risk scores predict cognitive decline in late middle age but the Framingham risk scores may have an advantage over the dementia risk score for use in primary prevention for assessing risk of cognitive decline and targeting of modifiable risk factors. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Exercise at midlife may reduce the odds of dementia in older adulthood, suggesting that exercise interventions should be explored as a potential strategy for delaying disease onset. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 264 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Mean age was 73.5 years and mean HbA1c was 6.8%. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
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
Intentional weight loss through diet was associated with cognitive improvement in patients with MCI. 4 key findings →
Participants: 40 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A decade has passed since we published a comprehensive review in this journal addressing the topic of promoting successful cognitive aging, making this a good time to take stock of the field. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Obesity in middle age increases the risk of future dementia independently of comorbid conditions. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared to people without diabetes, people with diabetes have a greater rate of decline in cognitive function and a greater risk of cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
10 of the 3,281 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 10. The same 10 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →