NULISA plasma biomarkers revealed disease-specific protein patterns. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 194 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
30,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Over a maximum follow-up of 26 years, the median time to event was 1·2 years (IQR 0·2-3·3) in the delirium group and 1·3 years (0·3-3·6) in the control group. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 909 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Out of 929 patients, 184 (20%) experienced POD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 929 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
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
61/100
A total of 621 participants (aged 69.9 ± 3.8, 71% female) had available data for the main analyses and 355 had PET Centiloid data available. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 621 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From 2520 records screened, 16 population-based studies were included and 12 contributed to meta-analyses. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mary Poppins famously asserted that "a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down," but this bon mot is likely wrong in almost every way. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 74,148 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
It was not possible to demonstrate significant differences on the co-primary clinical endpoints (ADAS-cog 11 and ADCS-ADL 23 ) at 52 weeks due to symptomatic activity in the control arm. 5 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial Participants: 598 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over a mean follow-up of 8.4 years (range, Conclusions and relevance This cohort study of older adults found that adherence to a dietary pattern with lower inflammatory potential was associated with lower dementia risk among individuals with AD pathology and broader neurobiological risk. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,865 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APOE ε4 carriers have increased Alzheimer's disease risk and altered omega-3 metabolism. 5 key findings →
Design: phase-2-trial Participants: 365 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The effects on depression and other outcomes were consistent with those observed for in-person programs, suggesting the viability of well-designed automated intervention. 2 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 274 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Longer follow-up and testing across diverse LEP communities are needed to assess diagnosis, treatment initiation, and caregiver trajectories. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 287 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
This study included 10 333 FHS 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 886 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our sample included 11,105 patients (median age 77, 51% female), with 2299 in the hallway group and 8806 in the non-hallway group. 5 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 11,105 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
Of 689 participants, CI was associated with delirium (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 3.64, 95% CI: 1.31, 9.49, P-value = 0.009), 90-day complications (aOR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.14, 4.28, P-value = 0.015), and 90-day composite adverse outcomes (aOR: 2.03, 95% CI: 1.03, 3.81, P-value = 0.033). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 689 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
A total of 42 342 participants from the pooled cohorts were included (mean [SD] age, 61.3 [9.8] years; 55.0% female). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 342 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Plasma p-tau217 concentrations, considered together with APOE genotype, might help stratify risk and estimate the timing of future cognitive impairment in asymptomatic individuals who are at increased risk for Alzheimer's disease, such as those with a family history of dementia or known APOE-ε4 carrier status. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 8,582 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One hundred sixteen participants consented and 93 (46 waitlist control, 47 intervention) were included in the analyses. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 93 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results suggest that all adults with Down syndrome should be screened for Alzheimer's disease pathology starting shortly before age 40 years and considered for clinical trials. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 328 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 2157 older adults without dementia (mean [SD] age 71.2 [9.2] years; 1337 female [62.0%]), 1680 participants had longitudinal cognition data and 569 participants (26.4%) had APOE34/44 genotypes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,680 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this study's cohort of 155 individuals with SETRS (mean [SD] age, 59.3 [10.3] years; 56 female participants [36.1%]), 153 of 155 (98.7%) scored below the cutoff of 26 for mild cognitive impairment, and 73 of 155 (47.1%) scored below the cutoff of 10 for severe dementia (mean [SD] MoCA score, 9.8 [6.4]). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 155 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accurate diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) remains challenging, with misdiagnosis potentially leading to harmful treatment decisions. 3 key findings →
Participants: 740 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
59/100
BackgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) accounts for the majority of dementia-related disorders among aging populations. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
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 30,180 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 30,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.9%), 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 →