27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Two hundred eighty dyads were enrolled. Caregivers during the intervention period reported lower levels of RSS of 0.7 points (standard deviation [SD]: 0.8) compared to the caregivers in the control period. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The ACT group reported significantly greater improvements in stress (P=.043) and psychological QoL (P=.014) in the posttest compared to the control group. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 16 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Less EQ and YoE were associated with brain alterations across groups. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 7,533 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Zinc deficiency represents an independent, modifiable risk factor for new-onset dementia with a clear dose-response relationship. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 34,249 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The incidence of the first episode of delirium after hip surgery in the elderly was 1.87 events per 1000 PYs. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 118,682 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early onset hallucinations were significantly more common in pLBD than pAD (OR 0.069 [95% CI 0.012-0.397], p = 0.003) or mixed AD+LBD (OR 0.09 [95% CI 0.010-0.771], p = 0.028) and there was a greater increase in the odds of hallucinations over time in pAD and AD+LBD than pLBD such that there was was no difference in the prevalence of late-onset hallucinations between pLBD, pAD or AD+LBD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 37 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In addition to outperforming existing plasma biomarkers, the dSST predicted mid-life dementia risk over a 20-year follow-up across two independent cohorts with different ethnic backgrounds (areas under the curve [AUCs]: dSST 0.68-0.70, dSST+age 0.75-0.81). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 11,277 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 2699 articles initially screened, 21 studies were included, encompassing over 1 million participants. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundAccurate and accessible risk assessment tools are essential for effective dementia management. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 27,768 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
74,396 patients (median age 84, IQR 78-89; 68% female) were analyzed. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 74,396 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified a total of 1,686,759 patients with incident dementia (mean (SD) age, 82.15 (6.90) years; 61.70% female) and 3,373,518 matched controls (mean (SD) age, 82.15 (6.90) years; 61.70% female). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,686,759 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
NPS were highly prevalent (≥90%) in early and late bvFTD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 354 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
Eighty older adults with MCI (median age 86.50 years) participated, with an average attendance rate of 86.25% in the intervention group. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
(n = 16,683) had an average age of 69.07 ± 7.34, 72.04% were female, and had an average of 16.66 ± 2.26 years of education. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 16,683 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 2018, Carlos et al. [2] reviewed 21 studies from the SUN project that focused on the association between the MDP and several incident chronic diseases, concluding that high Mediterranean diet adherence was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, weight gain, metabolic syndrome, depression, cognitive decline, and nephrolithiasis, and with a lower heart rate and mitigation of the effects of obesity on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes, and our results suggested that the Mediterranean diet may improve fertility. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 79 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among all participants, 247 (11.7%) had IADL limitations at baseline, and 151 (7.1%) developed dementia during follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,118 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
CogDrisk-ML outperformed CAIDE in the UK Biobank and Whitehall II cohorts; however, it provided similar C statistics in the ARIC dataset. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a major cause of dementia and cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data collection commenced in November 2023 and finished in July 2024, with the enrollment of 49 older adults with MCI (n=40, 81.6%, assigned to the experimental group [EG] and n=9, 18.4%, to the control group [CG]) conducted from October 2023 to April 2024. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 40 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The CITA GO-ON Study, as a part of the World-Wide FINGERS network, is designed to validate the efficacy of a multidomain lifestyle intervention for dementia prevention and contribute valuable data to inform public health strategies fostering healthy, active aging. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,051 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified 1143 dementia-free individuals with acute stroke during follow-up: 1061 (92.8%) ischemic, 82 (7.2%) hemorrhagic, 49.9% female, and 30.8% Black. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The telmisartan group had the lowest risk of all dementias (telmisartan vs NT-ARB: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60 to 1.01; telmisartan vs angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.94). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 39,665 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The COVID-19 pandemic forced adult day services (ADS) to close and abruptly end in-person services to clients. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 19 Evidence: high
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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.
1,032 records (3.8% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 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 →