No amyloid-related imaging abnormalities occurred. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
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.
46/100
Among 738 MA and 1488 FFS participants, weighted mean age was 76 years (SD 7.0), 59% were female, and 9% had probable dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In total, 147 participants across 21 US sites were invited to participate and 111 provided informed consent. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 147 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PLWD proactively enrolled in a dementia care program have high baseline rates of behavioral issues and their caregivers have elevated depression and stress scores. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 195 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In a sample of 1218 new HCBS users (75% female, 77% Black; mean [SD] age, 70.5 [7.5] years), Medicaid HCBS initiation was associated with a decrease in probability of ED use (-2.70 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.18 to -1.22 percentage points) and a decrease in probability of inpatient discharge (-2.63 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.75 to -1.51 percentage points). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An increasing number of older adults reside in assisted living (AL) toward the end of life, and it remains unclear if this trend represents an additional place of care and end-of-life transition before eventual nursing home admission. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 273,722 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
105 participants (47 Latino, 55 Black), 64.7 (±8.8) years-old, female 66 (63%), with 16 (±2.3) years of education were assessed. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 105 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Additionally, growing evidence suggests that neuroinflammation may modulate the effects of tau spread on cognitive impairment in AD [Peretti, Débora E., et al., Brain 147.12 (2024): 4094‐4104.]. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 354 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
46/100
Four cognitive phenotypes emerged. One phenotype (18% of Aβ+ participants) showed the steepest cognitive decline, highest progression on the CDR, greater baseline medial temporal tau, and fastest neocortical tau accumulation over 4.6 years (hazard ratio [HR] for decline ≈ 2.9). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diagnostic challenges stem from overlapping symptoms of co-occurring neurodevelopmental and psychiatric conditions, rendering standard dementia tools insufficient. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
16% of individuals were identified as tau-accumulators. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 29 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results provide clear evidence that CU older adults with both amyloid plaques and tau aggregates measured with PET will develop cognitive impairments if the disease is not stopped. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Family caregivers provide essential care and support for individuals living with dementia, yet their contributions and needs are often unrecognized within formal health care systems. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Person-centered care provides a critical framework for dementia support in long-term care facilities, emphasizing attention to each resident's evolving needs, personal history, preferences, and values. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 289,649 included participants, 137,480 (47.5 %) were male, and the mean age was 56.6 ± 8.1 years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Predictive performance was comparable across algorithms, with R² ranging from 0.201 to 0.361, highest in the MCI_All dataset. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 4,958 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a neurodegenerative disorder primarily affecting the frontal and temporal lobes, leading to significant impairments in executive function, social behavior, and emotional regulation. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) presents a significant global health challenge, necessitating accurate and early prediction methods for effective intervention and treatment planning. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Differentiation of Alzheimer disease dementia (ADD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) remains a challenge. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major public health concern in societies with increasingly ageing populations. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Upon initiation of guanfacine, patients with delirium had a reduction in daily antipsychotic exposure and a decrease in positive delirium screens. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 56 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PurposeDelirium is a common yet preventable complication of hospitalization, surgery and illness that is associated with poor outcomes. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Pulse pressure, but not mean arterial pressure, significantly mediated the relationship between age and white matter hyperintensity load. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence on neighborhood food stores and public health is limited. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 47,318 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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