alzhub.org
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.

Research

31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 326–350 of 530 studies · free to read (page 14 of 22) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Showing 530 studies tagged mini-mental — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

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

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,851 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

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.

Machine Learning–Based Cognitive Assessment With The Autonomous Cognitive Examination: Randomized Controlled Trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2025-07-30

The ACoE's overall cognitive assessments were significantly reliable (ICC [intraclass correlation coefficient]=0.89; P<.001). 5 key findings →

Participants: 35 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Event-related potential markers of subjective cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment during a sustained visuo-attentive task

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. NeuroImage Clinical 2025-01-01

• SCD patients showed attenuation of sensory (P1, N1, P2) and cognitive (P300, P600, P900) components, with performance-related gains. • MCI patients exhibited neural compensations, reversing the downward trend observed in SCD, which resulted in a non-monotonic pattern of ERPs. • The progression of cognitive decline was linked to electrophysiological discontinuity, suggesting resilience mechanisms in both low and higher order cognitive regions. 5 key findings →

Participants: 178 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Degree of discrepancy between self and other-reported everyday functioning by cognitive status: dementia, mild cognitive impairment, and healthy elders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. International journal of geriatric psychiatry 2005-09-01

Although there may be some mild functional changes associated particularly with the MCI-memory impaired subtype, individuals with MCI do not appear to under-report their functional status as can often been seen in persons with dementia. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Deficits in narrative discourse elicited by visual stimuli are already present in patients with mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Frontiers in aging neuroscience 2015-05-28

Language batteries used to assess the skills of elderly individuals, such as naming and semantic verbal fluency, present some limitations in differentiating healthy controls from patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (a-MCI). 1 key finding →

Participants: 77 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

A New Framework for Automatic Detection of Patients With Mild Cognitive Impairment Using Resting-State EEG Signals

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society 2020-07-31

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) can be an indicator representing the early stage of Alzheimier's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Language Performance of Individuals at Risk for Mild Cognitive Impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR 2019-03-01

Language performance deficits can appear early before impairment in episodic memory, visuospatial construction ability, or mental status in individuals at risk for MCI. 5 key findings →

Participants: 86 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Evaluating the Feasibility of Frequent Cognitive Assessment Using the Mezurio Smartphone App: Observational and Interview Study in Adults With Elevated Dementia Risk

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2020-04-02

Despite the extended study duration, participants demonstrated high compliance with the schedule of daily learning tasks and were extremely positive about their experiences. 2 key findings →

Participants: 20 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Abnormal salience network in normal aging and in amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Human brain mapping 2013-11-12

The salience network (SN) serves to identify salient stimuli and to switch between the central executive network (CEN) and the default-mode network (DMN), both of which are impaired in Alzheimer's disease (AD)/amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

The Goteborg MCI study: mild cognitive impairment is a heterogeneous condition

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry 2005-11-01

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has been considered a transitional state between normal aging and dementia, characterised by memory impairment but normal general cognitive functioning. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Performance of the Brain Health Test-7, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment for detecting subjects with mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. International Psychogeriatrics 2025-04-01

The three cognitive assessment tools were valid for detecting subjects with MCI or dementia according to ROC analysis. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,090 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Resource-stratified machine learning framework for cognitive status classification and mild cognitive impairment to dementia progression prediction

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Alzheimer s Research & Therapy 2026-03-07

The Level 3 model achieved high classification performance (AUC: 93.98%), and the Level 1 model achieved comparable performance (AUC: 91.53%). 5 key findings →

Participants: 31,081 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Mild cognitive impairment‐to‐Alzheimer's dementia progression risk: the contribution of the Interceptor project

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2026-04-01

Dementia developed in 104 individuals (29.6%), including 85 (22.4%) who met core clinical criteria for probable and possible Alzheimer's disease dementia. 3 key findings →

Participants: 398 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Development of a neural network-based risk prediction model for mild cognitive impairment in older adults with functional disability

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. BMC Public Health 2025-06-02

The results indicated that residence location, alcohol consumption, life satisfaction, depressive symptoms, and education level are key factors influencing the risk of MCI among older adults with functional disability. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Evaluating cognitive impairment among a geriatric population in India using the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)–multilingual dementia research and assessment (MUDRA) toolbox

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Indian Journal of Psychiatry 2025-10-01

Among 1013 participants, 847 screened positive on MoCA (70.4% mild, 13.2% moderate) for cognitive impairment and were assessed further for other domains of ICMR-MUDRA toolbox. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,013 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

The Risk of Incident Mild Cognitive Impairment and Progression to Dementia Considering Mild Cognitive Impairment Subtypes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders extra 2017-01-01

Cognitively normal subjects with an APOE ε4 allele had a higher likelihood of developing aMCI and the MCI subtype was associated with the dementia subtype. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

The cognitive correlates of functional status: a review from the Committee on Research of the American Neuropsychiatric Association

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. The Journal of neuropsychiatry and clinical neurosciences 2007-01-01

This report reviews the state of the literature and opportunities for research related to the cognitive correlates of functional status. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ 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.

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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.

1,048 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