Affective symptoms are of prognostic utility, but interventions to prevent dementia syndromes are limited. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Obesity is a growing worldwide health problem, affecting many people due to excessive saturated fat consumption, lack of exercise, or a sedentary lifestyle. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At 3-year follow-up, 85 participants had developed dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,149 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among women, foreign-born Hispanics have higher odds of CIND and dementia than Whites. 4 key findings →
Participants: 19,099 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The cognitive impairment patterns and the association with Alzheimer's disease (AD) in mental disorders remain poorly understood. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, and diabetes were overrepresented in AA participants, but were not associated with cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 261 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
SNF discharges decreased while home and HHA discharges increased during the pandemic. 5 key findings →
Participants: 830,656 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The sample (n = 26,728) was equally distributed across gender (55.1% women) and education (50.8% completed HS/GED diploma), and 30% came from under-represented racial/ethnic groups. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 26,728 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We assessed 452,718 patients (mean age: 67.16 years). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 452,718 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After PSM, 7914 participants were analyzed (3957 consumers; 3957 non-consumers). 5 key findings →
Participants: 7,914 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this cohort, 28 participants developed Alzheimer's dementia, 5 frontotemporal dementia, 2 Lewy body dementia, and 2 vascular dementia during the follow-up. 5 key findings →
Participants: 56 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified 471 proteins with significant interaction effects between T2D and dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,920 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Most studies suggest depression may contribute to neurodegeneration, but clinical, neuroimaging, and longitudinal evidence also support its role as a prodrome or consequence, indicating a bidirectional relationship. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
When risk factors were evaluated independently, we found less early-life education, mid-life hearing loss and diabetes, and late-life social isolation and visual loss associated with increased odds for dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,526 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Education, smoking, diabetes, depression, physical activity and social isolation were associated with a 1.13-1.55 times increased risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants showed a significantly slower rate of cognitive decline than expected from the AD reference rate (p < 0.001), with many demonstrating stabilized ADAS-Cog scores during their respective treatment periods, ranging from 1 to 3 years. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The analysis included 121 521 participants (mean age: 55.7 years; 53.5% women), followed for a median of 10.9 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 121 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vestibular disorders were linked to higher risks of all‐cause dementia (HR 1.86 and 95% CI 1.04–3.30), Alzheimer's disease (AD, 2.36, and 1.01–5.51), and vascular dementia (VD, 3.35, and 1.48–7.59). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 0.02). Lifetime exposure to cognitive enrichment was related to lower risk of AD dementia and a slower rate of cognitive decline, including after adjustment for common ADRD pathologies, indicating higher resilience provided by lifetime enrichment. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
49/100
Among 104 537 individuals, the absolute 10-year risk of Alzheimer disease in 3017 women and men who were carriers of the APOE ɛ44 genotype was, respectively, 7% and 6% at age 60-69 years, 16% and 12% at age 70-79 years, and 24% and 19% at age 80 years and older. 1 key finding →
Participants: 537 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Design the FINnish ORAL Health Study in Long-Term Care study is a cross-sectional clinical research comprising findings on oral and general health and nutrition. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
49/100
Seventy-five subjects with MCI progressed to dementia by last follow-up. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multimorbidity (the presence of two or more long-term conditions [LTCs]) was suggested to exacerbate the neuronal injuries. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CBSD revealed a framework for how economic hardship, especially low income and unemployment, reduces access to physical and mental healthcare, driving dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 234 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were observable geographic variations in education (range 13.4-16.2 years, Figure 1), age (range 66.7-72.4 years) and severable modifiable risk factors for dementia across Tasmania, Australia. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 8,891 Evidence: moderate
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 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.
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 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.
1,040 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 965 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