31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The MAINTAIN intervention demonstrated high fidelity in home assessments and intervention delivery, with participants receiving a mean of 15 of the 22 available sessions with a range of 5-25 sessions. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of the patients, 82.2% were receiving at least one dizziness-associated medication and 71.2% at least one hypotension-associated medication. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 210 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A positive 4AT (≥1) on admission demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.87 and specificity of 0.71 when compared to a clinical diagnosis of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 221 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frailty status (prefrail/frail n = 520, robust n = 625) at baseline did not modify the effect of intervention on global cognition during the 2-year follow-up (P-value for frailty × intervention × time interaction > .05). 5 key findings →
Participants: 520 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study included 3540 participants with RVC data and 489 with WMH data (median [IQR] age: 73.2 [71.4-76.3] and 72.5 [71.2-75.4] years; female: 52.9% and 47.6%) over a median follow-up of 7.4 [IQR 5.5-8.5] and 3.8 [IQR 2.9-5.3] years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,540 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Out of 462,327 eligible participants, those with constipation were associated with higher incidence of three outcome diseases (1415/20,263 [7.0%]) than those without (18,848/442,064 [4.3%]), with adjusted hazard ratio (HR) being 1.35 [1.27-1.42]. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
of 74,486 decedents (60.5% women; mean age 87.1 years (standard deviation: 7.1)), 82.6% had at least one ED visit in their last year of life. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Four thousand four hundred eighty-six participants were included (mean age 71.3 ± 4.7 years, 30% participants Aβ+, 59% female). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mean age was 83.5 years (delirium 78.7 vs non-delirium 88.4); 13/20 were female; 17/20 had premorbid cognitive decline/impairment or dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
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
The AB Cognitive Screen (ABCS) 135, sensitive in differentiating MCI from dementia, was modified to improve sensitivity and specificity, producing the quick mild cognitive impairment (Qmci) screen. 4 key findings →
Participants: 630 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous studies have indicated a prevalence of dementia in older admissions of ∼42% in a single London teaching hospital, and 21% in four Queensland hospitals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 120 people with delirium participated [median age 86.3, range 70-99, 67 (55.8%) female and 55 (45.8%) with dementia]. 5 key findings →
Participants: 120 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 18 614 ORCHARD-EPR patients (mean/SD age = 82.9/7.4 years, dementia = 20%), certain delirium (delirium = yes or ICD-10 delirium code) was present in 3077/18 614 (17%,95%CI 16%-17%) of whom 1199/3077 (39%) had dementia, and uncertain delirium (delirium = uncertain and no ICD-10 code) in 2007 (11%,10%-11%) of whom 773/2007 (39%) had dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 731 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 75 221 admissions, 62 188 (82.7%; 33 625 unique patients; mean age 80.2 years; 55.8% female) had a 4AT on admission. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The risk of delirium admissions was elevated for the first 1-30 days of prescriptions [IRR 1.54 (95% CI 1.30-1.82) for men, 1.44 (1.22-1.70) for women] and whilst reducing over time for women [1.10 (0.94-1.29) for 91-365 days of prescriptions], it remained elevated for men [1.38 (1.17-1.64)]. 5 key findings →
Participants: 293 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Greater spend on social care (including availability of care home places) was associated with reduced spend in health care, with shorter length of hospital stay and decrease in readmissions. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Falls pose a major threat to the well-being and quality of life of older people. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
121 SCU admissions involved 107 unique patients. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
AWVs were associated with reduced risks for falls (HR: 0.976 for 2 AWVs; 0.936 for ≥3 AWVs) and fractures (HR: 0.978 for 1 AWV; 0.960 for 2 AWVs; 0.927 for ≥3 AWVs), with greater reductions observed with more AVWs. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A new assessment of Activities of Daily Living has been developed specifically for use with people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 4288 consultations with patients ≥65 years in the study periods, 402 (9.4%) involved possible or probable delirium. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data point to cultural, socioeconomic and systemic barriers to accessing quality EOL care for PLWD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 29 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Biomarkers specific to AD pathology (p-tau217, GFAP) rather than peripheral inflammation had robust prognostic value in established AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 333 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is a well-documented tendency for cognitive tests to underestimate the abilities of older people in black and minority ethnic groups. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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