Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Find studies

Showing 26–50 of 71 studies in Cognitive tests and assessment · tagged Treatments (page 2 of 3) · 31,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 71 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

What “Cognitive tests and assessment” covers

Cognitive tests and assessment — Memory and thinking tests, screening tools and rating scales: how well they measure what they claim to.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Treatment of vascular risk factors is associated with slower decline in Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Neurology 2009-09-01

The aim of this observational study was to evaluate whether the treatment of VRF is associated with a slower cognitive decline in patients who have AD without cerebrovascular disease (CVD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 72 Evidence: high

What is known Herbal medicines have been used in the treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia but with variable response. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

Combinations of plasma and digital cognitive markers show promise for scalable diagnosis and prognosis of ADRD. 1 key finding →

Participants: 49 Evidence: low

The effectiveness and safety of yokukansan (TJ-54), a traditional Japanese medicine (kampo) for the treatment of the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), were evaluated in 106 patients diagnosed as having Alzheimer's disease (AD) (including mixed-type dementia) or dementia with Lewy bodies. 4 key findings →

Participants: 106 Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the cause of more than two-thirds of all dementia cases. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Currently there are no disease-modifying treatments for Parkinson's disease dementia (PDD), a condition linked to aggregation of the protein α-synuclein in subcortical and cortical brain areas. 4 key findings →

Participants: 75 Evidence: high

In this pragmatic prospective cohort study we found that the PDT was used by elderly care physicians, with mediocre user satisfaction. 2 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

We will test if CCT, versus CPT, leads to improved cognitive functioning, transfers to functional ability and tasks of everyday life and impacts hippocampal volume changes and changes in the default mode network of the brain measured by resting-state functional MRI. 4 key findings →

Participants: 100 Evidence: low

Screening in primary care using the DCR is feasible, and shows criterion and convergent validity with a "gold standard" screening tool for detecting cognitive impairment-the MOCA. 2 key findings →

Participants: 114 Evidence: low

Oxidative stress and neuronal energy depletion are characteristic biochemical hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →

Design: open-label trial Participants: 43 Evidence: high

Participants showed a significantly slower rate of cognitive decline than expected from the AD reference rate (p < 0.001), with many demonstrating stabilized ADAS-Cog scores during their respective treatment periods, ranging from 1 to 3 years. 5 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Aging populations are at increased risk of sleep deficiencies (e.g., insomnia) that are associated with a variety of chronic health risks, including Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). 2 key findings →

Participants: 100 Evidence: low

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that destroys patient memory and cognition, communication ability with the social environment and the ability to carry out daily activities. 4 key findings →

Design: open-label trial Participants: 43 Evidence: low

A significant median Centiloid reduction of 30.9 was observed, with a 24.1% amyloid PET negativity rate after six months. 3 key findings →

Participants: 42 Evidence: moderate

This study is a rare example that focuses on both groups with SCI and AD. 2 key findings →

Participants: 60 Evidence: low

Nonclinical data indicate that ACU193 can reduce the toxic effects of amyloid β oligomers. 3 key findings →

Design: clinical trial Evidence: high

Cholinesterase inhibitors with additional nicotinic activity, such as galantamine, may be useful in PD patients with dementia (PDD) since stimulation of nicotinic receptors may prevent the down-regulation that is likely to accompany cholinesterase inhibition and facilitate dopamine release in the striatum. 4 key findings →

Design: open-label trial Evidence: low

Oxidative stress and energy depletion are characteristic biochemical hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD), thus antioxidants with positive effects on glucose metabolism such as thioctic (alpha-lipoic) acid should exert positive effects in these patients. 3 key findings →

Evidence: high

Treatment of cognitive impairment after poststroke depression : a double-blind treatment trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Stroke 2000-07-01

Patients with poststroke major depression have a greater severity of cognitive impairment than nondepressed patients even when matched for size and location of stroke lesion. 4 key findings →

Participants: 33 Evidence: low

Data collection began in March 2024. So far 562 people completed a pre-screening online questionnaire, with 190 passing pre-screening of whom 54% met eligibility criteria. 5 key findings →

Participants: 24 Evidence: high

The cognitive assessment protocol of the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study (ADCS) was designed to evaluate the reliability and validity of cognitive assessment measures that might be valuable additions to the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS) or other concise batteries used in antidementia drug trials.

↑ Change the filters

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 31,780 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 31,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66% of the library) and OpenAlex (16%), 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.

1,052 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