29,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
An eight-week course of IVIG totaling 2 g/kg in MCI is safe but is not sufficient to sustain an initial reduction in brain atrophy or a temporary delay in conversion to dementia at five years. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diabetes was associated with an increased risk of MCI in elderly persons. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,450 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Mini-Mental State (MMS) is a brief structured test of cognitive function. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 450 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The prevalences of overall MCI, MCI-A, MCI-CVD, MCI-VRF, and MCI-O were 20.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 20.0-21.6%), 6.1% (95% CI = 5.7-6.6%), 3.8% (95% CI = 3.4-4.2%), 4.9% (95% CI = 4.5-5.4%), and 5.9% (95% CI = 5.5-6.4%) respectively. 2 key findings →
Participants: 10,276 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The identification of biological and pathophysiological processes implicated in different forms of dementia is itself dependent on reliable descriptions of cognitive performance and capacities. 2 key findings →
Participants: 60 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The proposed approach offers a fully automated identification of MCI and dementia based on a recorded neuropsychological test, providing an opportunity to develop a remote screening tool that could be adapted easily to any language. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,084 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mean follow-up period for the cohort was 34 months. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
When patients with MCI underwent clinical follow-up, 29 progressed to dementia, while 44 remained stable. 2 key findings →
Participants: 73 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study investigated cross-sectional and longitudinal neuropsychological data from 55 patients: 38 with Alzheimer's disease and 18 with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 55 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We developed an accurate prognostic model for predicting MCI-to-dementia progression over a three-year period. 4 key findings →
Participants: 139 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A CDR rating of 0.5 (uncertain/very mild dementia) was obtained by 27.6% of participants, whereas 1.2% had CDR ≥ 1 (mild or moderate dementia). 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,036 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The speed and severity of clinical progression after Alzheimer disease (AD) diagnosis varies and depends on multiple factors, most not well elucidated. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A 10-15% ACR only appears to hold true in clinical samples monitored over a short observation period. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The CANTAB battery was administered to a large group (n = 787) of elderly volunteers in the age range from 55 to 80 years. 4 key findings →
Participants: 787 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients with progressive dementia invariably evolve to a stage where they can no longer be tested by standard neuropsychological tests. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 26 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) has a high sensitivity for detecting cognitive dysfunction. 4 key findings →
Participants: 758 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is widely used in clinical practice, few norms exist for healthy populations covering a broad range of ages. 4 key findings →
Participants: 908 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our understanding of risk factors for COVID‑19, including pre-existing medical conditions and genetic variations, is limited. 4 key findings →
Participants: 389,620 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The average detection rates for mild cognitive impairment is 0.08 (interquartile range=0.00-0.02) for both clinicians and practices, suggesting that only about 8% of expected cases were diagnosed on average. 3 key findings →
Participants: 25 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Age, education level, number of pain sites, pain duration, pain level, depression and sleep quality were risk factors of MCI in older patients with chronic pain. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 612 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
NPS was longitudinally associated with performance in each cognitive domain. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,247 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases the risk of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the past 10 years, there has been a virtual explosion in the literature concerning the construct of mild cognitive impairment.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall sample had a mean ACE-III score of 91/100 (SD 6) with 15.7% (16/102) scoring at or below the cut-off score considered to represent objective cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We investigated the prevalence of dementia and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and the factors associate with risk of dementia from a representative nationwide sample of Korean elders. 8,199 randomly-sampled Koreans aged 65 years or older were invited to participate in the Phase I screening assessment using Mini-Mental State Examination by door-to-door home visit, and 6,141 subjects (response rate = 74.9%) responded. 2 key findings →
Participants: 6,141 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
10 of the 881 studies in this tag that have a study page, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
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. Show only studies that are free to read
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 29,780 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 29,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (63.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.1%), 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 →