30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
MCI prevalence varied among Hispanic/Latino backgrounds, but not as widely as reported in the previous studies. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,377 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Whether mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has a distinct neuropathological profile that reflects an intermediate state between no cognitive impairment and dementia is not clear. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 162 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results suggest that diet may be a powerful environmental factor that modulates Alzheimer disease risk through its effects on central nervous system concentrations of Aβ42, lipoproteins, oxidative stress, and insulin. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 29 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall unadjusted pooled odds ratio for the progression of MCI to dementia in people with diabetes/MetS was 1.67 (95% CI 1.27-2.19); the pooled odds ratio for progression in diabetes + MCI was 1.53 (95% CI 1.20-1.97) and in people with MetS + MCI was 2.95 (95% CI 1.23-7.05). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this study, lower AD signature region volumes, brain microhemorrhages, higher WMH volumes, and infarcts were risk factors associated with dementia in older community-based residents. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,553 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall estimates of treatment effect were calculated using a fixed-effect model, and statistical heterogeneity was measured using a standard Chi(2) statistic. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 112 study participants with MCI, mean (SD) age was 76.6 (6.9) years, 55 were women (49.1%), and 27 progressed to dementia (24.1%), with an incidence rate of 121 per 1000 person-years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 112 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuropsychiatric symptoms in MCI are associated with significantly an increased risk of incident dementia and AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,821 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aimed to determine the extent to which cognitive measures can predict progression from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to Alzheimer's type dementia (AD), assess the predictive accuracy of different cognitive domain categories, and determine whether accuracy varies as a function of age and length of follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,365 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No statistically significant pooled association emerged between MetS and incident dementia and AD. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 18,313 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is recognized to be in the Alzheimer disease (AD) cognitive continuum. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,585 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APPLE-Tree is an accessible intervention associated with small improvements in cognition, although these results were not statistically significant. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 486 older adults who provided consent, 375 (with rMDD, MCI, or both) received at least 1 intervention session (mean [SD] age, 72.2 [6.4] years; 232 women [62%] and 143 men [38%]). 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, but not the Mini-Mental State Examination, has adequate psychometric properties as a screening instrument for the detection of mild cognitive impairment or dementia in Parkinson disease. 3 key findings →
Participants: 132 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted after adjusting for age, sex, and educational status. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,969 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite the promise of a multitude of sensors and devices that can be applied, there are no agreed-upon standards for digital biomarkers, nor are there comprehensive evidence-based results for which digital biomarkers may be demonstrated to be most effective. 3 key findings →
Participants: 279 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The SCIENCe study confirms that SCD is a heterogeneous group, with preclinical AD and subthreshold psychiatric features. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 114 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A diagnosis of COPD is associated with an increased risk for MCI, particularly NA-MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,425 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study included patients with clinical SCD and SCD-free, healthy control (HC) participants with available baseline CSF and/or longitudinal cognitive data from the observational DZNE Longitudinal Cognitive Impairment and Dementia study. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 672 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We developed models for individualized risk prediction of cognitive decline in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) using plasma biomarkers of β-amyloid (Aβ), tau and neurodegeneration. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 573 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Medial temporal lobe atrophy seems to be a more important predictor of cognition than small-vessel disease in MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 896 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diabetes increased the risk of conversion to dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The development of MCI is associated with measurements of cognition and depression, racial and constitutional factors, and cerebrovascular disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 927 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The construct of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has evolved over the past 10 years since the publication of the new MCI definition at the Key Symposium in 2003, but the core criteria have remained unchanged. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An algorithm-derived diagnosis of aMCI showed few sociodemographic associations but was consistently associated with higher disability and neuropsychiatric symptoms in addition to showing substantial variation in prevalence across LAMIC populations. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 15,376 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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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