Cognitive decline in older adults has significant implications for autonomy and quality of life. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This study explores the scientific landscape linking the Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS) to aging-related health outcomes through a comprehensive bibliometric and scoping review approach. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Only the real-tACS group improved in the oddball task and exhibited increased event-related EEG amplitude in the theta range. 2 key findings →
Participants: 27 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Minor neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) represent a transitional phase between normal cognitive aging and dementia, highlighting the importance of early interventions. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The MIND diet may buffer the cognitive consequences of cerebrovascular pathology and cortical atrophy in older adults at elevated dementia risk and promote cognitive resilience over general healthy eating guidelines. 2 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The primary analysis demonstrated significant improvements in multiple episodic memory measures across both intervention groups, with no significant differences observed between groups. 5 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
OF IMPACT: The results contribute new evidence towards an emerging ecological model of cognitive health. 5 key findings →
Participants: 16,404 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
What is already known about this topic?: As the Chinese population ages, the prevalence of cognitive impairment among older adults continues to increase. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After 5 years, 666 (86.8%) individuals were followed up. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The average MIND-NL scores for the short FFQ (8·4 ( sd 1·8) points) and food records (6·7 ( sd 1·7) points) showed to be significantly different ( P 0·20) were observed for 10 out of 15 MIND-NL diet components. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neighborhood disadvantage in later life is associated with poorer cognition and increased vulnerability to dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This diet has been shown to improve cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, vascular cognitive impairment, and vascular dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participant experiences and perceptions formed three themes: (1) aging accelerates PCDS progression, (2) PCDS threatening daily life, and (3) adapting to changes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An enriched environment is effective in stimulating learning and memory in animal models as well as in humans. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is a limited choice of psychometric tests for Portuguese speaking people which have been evaluated in well defined groups. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Age was similar between groups (p = 0.07). 5 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Through 2022, 5% of fee-for-service beneficiaries with dementia received CACP compared to 3% of MA beneficiaries (p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants were 1060 Veterans (response rate of 20.14%), mean age of 68.39 (SD=8.52) years, 59.0% Caucasian, 69.2% non‐Hispanic, 95.8% male, 12.0% screened positive for MCI and 15.6% for dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
's < 0.05). The findings suggest that neighborhood-level social deprivation might influence memory and motor status, primarily through its impact on motor brain health. 1 key finding →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research on Area Deprivation Index (ADI) suggests that the built environment and neighborhood stressors (e.g., violent crime incidents) play a role in later-life cognitive function. 4 key findings →
Participants: 147 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants racialized as Black living in a county with a history of lynching, disproportionate police killings, and disproportionate jail and prison incarceration were 2.8 (95%CI [-0.003, 5.834]) times more likely to have at least one incident of cognitive impairment between 2008-2020 compared to participants racialized as Black living in a county with a history of lynching and disproportionate police killings but not disproportionate incarceration. 3 key findings →
Participants: 185 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared to those in rural areas, participants who resided in urban areas during young adulthood had lower late midlife ADI (β = -0.85, p < .05), and better executive function (β = 0.19), processing speed (β = 0.24), and verbal fluency (β = 0.30) (ps < .05) in older adulthood. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
35/100
Age-related cognitive decline, characterized by memory loss, attention deficits, and reduced executive function, remains a major public health challenge, with limited pharmaceutical interventions offering symptomatic relief. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Five themes emerged. Both older adults and adult children had partial knowledge of dementia and were able to list learning new things and social activities as cognitively stimulating activities. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The program was effective, as evidenced by the multidimensional health gains achieved. 4 key findings →
Participants: 504 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.
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 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.
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 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 →