Dementia is one of the most common neurological syndromes in the world. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,315 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Prospective studies reporting associations between cognitive performance and subsequent incident dementia have been subject to attrition bias. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,051 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ReDeSign provides dementia training to convenience store workers and contributes to developing an inclusive community for people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 62 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
TM was associated with higher odds of 30-day readmission (OR = 1.07 [CI: 1.02 to 1.12]) and frequent hospitalizations (OR = 1.10 [CI: 1.06 to 1.14]) compared to MA. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 36,656 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Four states have clinician reporting mandates, 14 have mandates requiring drivers to self-report dementia diagnoses, and 32 states and the District of Columbia do not have explicit requirements. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 35 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For VA and Medicare cohorts, dementia diagnosis was absent in 88.7% and 80.5%, respectively, of follow-up encounters in the other system. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 68,092 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found a 2- to 3-fold geographical variation in dementia odds in Sweden, after twin random effects-likely to capture genetic and shared environmental variance-were removed. 5 key findings →
Participants: 27,680 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 65 participants (mean age = 79.4 years; women = 54%), 34% had dementia and 32% had CIND. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 65 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
We increased the findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability (FAIR) status of the cohorts through harmonization of data across cohorts, implementation of medical imaging repositories for scan management, implementation of the Personal Health Train infrastructure and provision of meta-data in existing cohort catalogues. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the 1 268 599 participants (mean age, 73.9 [SD, 6.1] years; n = 25 335 [2%] female), dementia incidence rates per 1000 person-years were lowest in the Mid-Atlantic (11.2; 95% CI, 11.1-11.4) and highest in the Southeast (14.0; 95% CI, 13.8-14.2). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 25 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This narrative review integrates longitudinal cohort studies, neuroimaging and biomarker research, and major clinical trials to examine how depression and cognitive decline interact across the dementia continuum. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Out of 3867 papers identified, 106 were included. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia prevalence was 22%, with 35% undiagnosed. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 2,003 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Interrater reliability was high (median 0.98). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
NH Black and Hispanic beneficiaries with dementia had higher disease course Medicare expenditures than NH Whites. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Improving quality and delivery of care for people with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) requires a comprehensive research agenda that encompasses the entire care continuum. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An estimated 47 million people worldwide are living with dementia in 2015, and this number is projected to triple by 2050. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The notion of what qualifies as vascular dementia has varied greatly since the first mention of dementia after apoplexy in ancient literature. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings cross-validate the previously published CDR-SB interpretative guidelines for staging dementia severity and extend those findings to a large heterogeneous sample of patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 462 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) leads to increased rates of dementia, including Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive dysfunction is increasingly recognized as an important comorbidity of diabetes mellitus. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
BPSD are universally present, bear correlates with dementia type and severity, and cause significant caregiver distress. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 107 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
A location dynamics model and ADRD-focused future directions are offered for guiding rural practitioners, researchers, and policymakers in mitigating rural disparities. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer's Association hosted the second Latinos & Alzheimer's Symposium in May 2021. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
Future studies need to examine underlying processes and develop interventions to reduce disparities while also being more broadly inclusive of diverse populations. 1 key finding →
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 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