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

29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 201–225 of 639 studies in Prevention and risk · free to read (page 9 of 26) · 29,780 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; 15,255 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.

Population Attributable Fraction of Incident Dementia Associated With Hearing Loss

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery 2025-04-17

Among 2946 participants (mean [SD] age, 74.9 [4.6] years; 1751 [59.4] female; 637 Black [21.6%] and 2309 White [78.4%] individuals), 1947 participants (66.1%) had audiometric hearing loss, and 1097 (37.2%) had self-reported hearing loss. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 2,946 Evidence: moderate

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

Cardiovascular Health Among Rural and Urban US Adults—Healthcare, Lifestyle, and Social Factors

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. JAMA Cardiology 2025-03-31

The study population consisted of 27 172 adults, including 4256 adults (14.0%) residing in rural areas, 14 741 (54.8%) in small or medium metropolitan areas, and 8175 (31.2%) in urban areas. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 172 Evidence: low

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

Ultra-processed food consumption and risk of dementia and Alzheimer's disease: The Framingham Heart Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. The Journal of Prevention of Alzheimer s Disease 2025-01-09

The study sample included 1,375 participants free of dementia and stroke at baseline (mean age 68 ± 6y, 54 % females). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 1,375 Evidence: moderate

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

Potential for primary prevention of Alzheimer's disease: an analysis of population-based data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. The Lancet Neurology 2014-07-13

Researchers analyzed population-based data and relative risks from existing meta-analyses to estimate the population-attributable risk of Alzheimer's disease worldwide, in the USA, Europe, and the UK for seven potentially modifiable risk factors.

Evidence: low

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

Sleep disorders and the risk of cognitive decline or dementia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Journal of Neurology 2025-10-13

This meta-analysis highlights sleep management as a pivotal modifiable factor in reducing the risk of all-cause cognitive decline. 5 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: moderate

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

Risk factors for non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. The Lancet. Neurology 2018-04-23

Non-motor symptoms (NMS) of Parkinson's disease can be predominant as the disease advances, thereby constituting a major source of disease burden for patients and caregivers. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

Race and Ethnicity, Lifestyle, Diet, and Survival in Patients With Prostate Cancer

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. JAMA Network Open 2025-02-26

A total of 2603 men with nonmetastatic PCa (mean [SD] age, 69.6 [7.1] years) were followed up, and 1346 deaths were documented, including 356 (24.6%) from CVD and 197 (14.6%) from PCa. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 2,603 Evidence: moderate

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

Impact of Vegan and Vegetarian Diets on Neurological Health: A Critical Review

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Nutrients 2025-02-28

Evidence suggests that vegan and vegetarian diets, when well planned, can be rich in phytonutrients and antioxidants, which have been associated with lower levels of inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). 5 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

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

Risk of Dementia in Individuals With Emergency Department Visits or Hospitalizations Due to Cannabis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. JAMA Neurology 2025-06-01

Individuals with cannabis use severe enough to require hospital-based care were at increased risk of a new dementia diagnosis compared with those with all-cause hospital-based care or the general population. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort Participants: 6,086,794 Evidence: moderate

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

Hearing aid effectiveness and probable dementia risk across 33 countries: A pooled analysis of seven cohorts

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Cell Reports Medicine 2026-05-12

Given the inconsistent evidence regarding hearing aid use and reduced dementia risk, this study evaluates whether hearing aid use, particularly effective use, is associated with lower probable dementia risk among hearing-impaired older adults. 2 key findings →

Design: cohort Participants: 61,089 Evidence: moderate

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

Exceptionally low likelihood of Alzheimer's dementia in APOE2 homozygotes from a 5,000-person neuropathological study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Nature communications 2020-02-03

Each additional copy of the apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) allele is associated with a higher risk of Alzheimer's dementia, while the APOE2 allele is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer's dementia, it is not yet known whether APOE2 homozygotes have a particularly low risk. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Delirium in older emergency department patients: recognition, risk factors, and psychomotor subtypes

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2009-01-20

Inclusion and exclusion criteria were met in 303 patients, and 25 (8.3%) presented to the ED with delirium. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 303 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 29,780 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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%), 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 (3.5% 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