29,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Although cholinesterase inhibitors have produced statistically significant treatment effects, their clinical meaningfulness in Alzheimer's disease is disputed. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 159 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In particular, systemic inflammation, vascular inflammation, and altered endothelial function may play roles in domain-specific cognitive decline of nondemented individuals. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,159 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nutrition is a modifiable factor potentially related to aging. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 661 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The expected outcome is to ensure the continuity of care from clinical practice to the patient's home, enabling also cost effectiveness and the empowerment of patient and caregiver in the care process, positively impacting on their quality of life. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This paper explores the rationale for a mobile phone-led intervention and details the app's effect on behavior change and subsequent clinical outcomes. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 102 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Poor vitamin D nutrition is linked with dementia, but vitamin D has not been tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) in Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Tau hyperphosphorylation is an early step in tau-mediated neurodegeneration and is associated with intracellular aggregation of tau as neurofibrillary tangles, neuronal and synaptic loss, and eventual cognitive dysfunction in Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We aimed to conduct a cost-utility analysis of DREAMS START compared with treatment as usual (TAU). 4 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 377 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Effective counseling and support interventions can reduce symptoms of depression in caregivers when patients are taking donepezil. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Feasibility was demonstrated with regard to recruitment, attrition, and treatment characteristics. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study showed that some deficits on IC domains, as measured by simple screening tests and questions, can be associated with higher healthcare costs. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 442 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Namaste Care Family program is dominant over usual care and, thus, cost-effective, although statistical uncertainty was considerable. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In preclinical studies, it has demonstrated vascular protective and antioxidant effects, with emerging evidence suggesting potential neuroprotective properties. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 185 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher plasma carotenoid concentrations were associated with slower cognitive decline in APOE ε4 carriers, potentially mitigating genetic risk. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 442 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One hundred forty-nine carers enrolled in the study. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 149 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The intervention group showed less discomfort (-1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.88 to -0.23) and fewer sentinel events (-0.40; 95% CI = -0.64 to -0.16), specifically pneumonia (-0.08; 95% CI = -0.14, -0.02). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 116 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Oral benfotiamine is safe and potentially efficacious in improving cognitive outcomes among persons with MCI and mild AD. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APPLE-Tree has a high probability of being cost-effective for a 1-point NTB gain, a difference previously associated with a three-fold reduction in 5-year dementia risk. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The results provide evidence for the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of extended nursing roles in dementia care, demonstrating that extended nursing roles reduce unmet needs and improve quality of life. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 417 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This sample of the older general public generally supported a policy of surrogate consent for AD research at baseline. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 503 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study suggests that initiation of a low dose of antihypertensive treatment does not significantly increase the risk of OH in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 255 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sixteen men and 24 women diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease participated in the study. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The number of studies examining ECHO and ECHO-like models of medical tele-education has been modest compared with the scope and scale of implementation throughout the USA and internationally. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study included 54 articles, comprising 14,446 participants from 10 countries. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 54 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This randomized clinical trial found that ADRD screening in PC was not associated with improvement in family member health-related quality of life, caregiver preparedness, or caregiving self-efficacy. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 1,808 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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.
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.
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 29,380 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.
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 29,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.3% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.3%), 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 →