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

30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 601–625 of 639 studies in Prevention and risk · free to read (page 25 of 26) · 30,580 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)

Browse by subject, author or institution

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

Other subjects

Authors

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

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,054 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Prevention and risk” covers

Prevention and risk — What might lower the risk of dementia — and what happened when those things were properly tested.

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.

Exercise, Physical Activity and Breast Cancer: The Role of Tumor-Associated Macrophages

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Exercise immunology review 2012-01-01

Regular exercise and physical activity provide many health benefits and are encouraged by medical professionals for the primary prevention of and adjuvant treatment of breast cancer Current consensus in the discipline of exercise oncology is that both regular physical activity and exercise training exert some protective effect against breast cancer risk, and may reduce morbidity in some advanced cases. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

An integrated Artificial Intelligence and optimization model for operational efficiency and risk reduction in Letter of Credit examination process

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. Decision Analytics Journal 2025-02-18

Digital transformation in banking has significantly improved efficiency, including in the critical Letter of Credit (LC) examination area. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The relationship between sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle, and diet quality with diabetes risk in overweight and obese Turkish adults

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 39 out of 100. BMC Public Health 2025-01-02

According to FINDRISC score, 38.1% of adults were at mild risk, 21.9% were at moderate risk, and 20.9% were at high risk. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Risk Governance for the Implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction in Algeria

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 2025-01-22

These disasters, along with other endogenous causes not addressed in this article, have significantly hindered the country’s progress toward key global objectives, including the SFDRR. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Precision prevention in exercise: Integrating OMICS biomarkers and artificial intelligence for injury risk assessment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Advanced Exercise and Health Science 2025-10-04

Exercise injuries present a significant challenge in medicine and public health, impacting exercise performance, career longevity, and overall quality of life. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Socially inclusive infrastructure for disaster risk reduction in urban planning: insights from the SADC region

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. Frontiers in Built Environment 2025-05-16

In response to these challenges, the study recommends a paradigm shift in urban planning towards the adoption of future-oriented and participatory approaches. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Cardiovascular Disease Management and Prevention in Saudi Arabia: Strategies, Risk Factors, and Targeted Interventions

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 38 out of 100. International Journal of Clinical Practice 2025-01-01

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain the main cause of mortality and are generally among the leading causes of morbidity worldwide, thus placing an immense burden on health care. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

An Assessment of Nature-Based Solutions Water Infrastructure for Flood Risk Reduction in Unplanned Area

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Civil Engineering Journal 2025-05-01

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the Brigif Reservoir as a pioneering nature-based infrastructure solution for mitigating flood risk in the Kemang area, a significant business district in South Jakarta, and to provide a potential raw water supply for city parks. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Ground robot technologies in wildfire risk reduction. The viewpoint of the fire service

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Progress in Disaster Science 2025-04-01

Fire service perceives the robot use in wildfire risk reduction more broadly than is reflected by currently developed disaster robots and existing disaster risk reduction concepts. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Factors of Vulnerability and Resilience of Persons with Disabilities During Disasters: Challenges and Strategies for Inclusive Risk Reduction

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. International Journal of Disaster Risk Management 2025-01-01

Persons with disabilities (PWDs) are among the most at-risk groups during disaster situations due to various physical, sensory, cognitive, and systemic challenges that hinder their ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from crises. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Integrating Ubuntu: embedding African philosophy into disaster risk reduction and management

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Frontiers in Sociology 2025-09-03

Rather than being the direct result of physical hazards, disasters emerge through socially constructed systems of vulnerability shaped by governance failures, structural inequalities, and historical injustices (Blaikie et al., 2014;Tierney, 2014;Gaillard, 2010). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

A synthesis review of four literature reviews of disaster risk reduction education for children

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 2025-05-13

This paper provides a critical interpretive synthesis review of fo++ur previously published literature reviews of disaster risk reduction (DRR) education for children. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Demographic Analysis of Occupational Safety in the Construction Sector: Strategies and Insights for Risk Reduction

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Buildings 2025-02-09

The construction sector is among the most dangerous industries, recognized for its significant rate of accidents with even more serious consequences, especially in developing countries. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Metabolic signals and innate immune activation in obesity and exercise

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 35 out of 100. Exercise immunology review 2015-01-01

The combination of a sedentary lifestyle and excess energy intake has led to an increased prevalence of obesity which constitutes a major risk factor for several co-morbidities including type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. 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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.

1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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