27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Of the 799 participants (mean [SD] age, 46.2 [11.6] years; 424 women [53.1%]) randomized, 641 completed the 12-month follow-up and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis: 341 (n = 4 mosques) in the intervention group and 300 (n = 4 mosques) in the control group. 5 key findings →
Participants: 799 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hearing aid use was associated with a modestly lower risk of probable dementia overall (Hazard Ratios, HR, 0.91), but the association was confined to participants reporting improvements in hearing (HR 0.86), with no apparent benefit among those reporting poor improvement in hearing (HR 0.98). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 61,089 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Linear and logistic regression showed that childhood rural residence was associated with lower memory (standardized beta (β) = -1.68, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [-2.39, -0.97]), executive function (β = -1.20, 95% CI [-1.84, -0.55]), and language fluency (β = -0.86, 95% CI [-1.64, -0.08]). 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,073 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a year-long, home-based individual cognitive stimulation (iCS) program on cognitive performance, mood, functional independence, and quality of life (QoL) in older adults with mild Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 18 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
=0.03), indicating improved executive function. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 33 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frailty status (prefrail/frail n = 520, robust n = 625) at baseline did not modify the effect of intervention on global cognition during the 2-year follow-up (P-value for frailty × intervention × time interaction > .05). 5 key findings →
Participants: 520 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The use of new technologies (i.e., mobile ecological momentary assessments [EMAs], activity tracker) in the PENSA study allows the collection of continuous data on lifestyle behaviors (diet and physical activity) and mood, enabling a personalized design as well as an intensive follow-up of participants. 2 key findings →
Participants: 200 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive decline leading to dementia represents a global health burden. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Loss of cholinergic neurons is associated with impaired cognitive function, particularly memory loss and Alzheimer disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,391 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
AD is a public health epidemic, which seriously impacts cognition, mood and daily activities; however, one type of activity, exercise, has been shown to alter these states. 3 key findings →
Participants: 104 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher prevalence of SCD in SGM adults highlights the importance of ensuring inclusive screenings, interventions, care services, and resources for SGM adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Causal pathways corresponding to all 4 hypotheses were supported. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Functional decline is associated with risk and can be efficiently assessed by participants and study partners (SPs). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence of cognitive impairment, MCI, and dementia among participants aged 60 years and older were 21.48% (95% CI, 19.90-23.10), 15.70% (95% CI, 14.30-17.10), and 5.77 (95% CI, 4.90-6.70), respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,233 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 5,145 participants included in the analyses, 747 (14.5 %) reported hearing loss, including 207 Black adults and 199 White adults. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,145 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These lessons emphasize the importance of ensuring tests are feasible across both high-income countries and LMICs, maintaining consistency within studies and over time, and designing comprehensive cognitive batteries for improved measurement precision of general and domain-specific phenotypes. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aims to identify depressive risks in elderly individuals with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and develop a predictive model using machine learning algorithms to enable timely interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings highlight the altered phases of swallowing in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 158 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
General and central obesity trajectories beyond midlife with persistently high or increasing patterns were significantly associated with an increased risk of developing cognitive decline and dementia in late life. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive training produced a significant, moderate improvement in cognitive task performance (Hedges’ g = 0.451, 95% CI 0.207–0.696; p < .001). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sarcopenia and its components were associated with baseline MMSE and MMSE changes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,146 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multiple factors affect cognitive health, such as age-related changes in the brain, injuries, mood disorders, substance abuse, and diseases. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A primary goal of research in cognitive impairment and dementia is to understand how some individuals retain sufficient cognitive function for a fulfilling life while many others are robbed of their independence, sometimes their essence, in the last years and decades of life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Impaired everyday function is a diagnostic criterion for dementia, and a determinant of healthcare utilization and caregiver burden. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Selenium is a trace element associated with antioxidant activity and is considered to be a protective agent against free radicals through enhanced enzyme activity. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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.
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 →