alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Research

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–25 of 103 studies in Cognitive tests and assessment (page 1 of 5) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Showing 103 studies tagged mild-cognitive — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Other subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Cognitive tests and assessment” covers

Cognitive tests and assessment — Memory and thinking tests, screening tools and rating scales: how well they measure what they claim to.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

The Study of Mental and Resistance Training (SMART) study—resistance training and/or cognitive training in mild cognitive impairment: a randomized, double-blind, double-sham controlled trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 2014-10-23

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases dementia risk with no pharmacologic treatment available. 4 key findings →

Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Montreal Cognitive Assessment for the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2015-10-29

Dementia is a progressive syndrome of global cognitive impairment with significant health and social care costs. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Participants: 9,422 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Diagnostic accuracy of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for cognitive screening in old age psychiatry: Determining cutoff scores in clinical practice. Avoiding spectrum bias caused by healthy controls

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100. International journal of geriatric psychiatry 2019-12-27

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is an increasingly used screening tool for cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 710 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Cognitive tests for the detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), the prodromal stage of dementia: Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. International journal of geriatric psychiatry 2018-11-27

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is regarded as a prodrome to dementia. 4 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Clinical prediction of Alzheimer disease dementia across the spectrum of mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100. Archives of general psychiatry 2007-12-01

From a longitudinal study of normal (Clinical Dementia Rating [CDR] = 0; n = 77) and mildly impaired (CDR = 0.5; n = 167) participants with 5 or more annual clinical assessments, baseline level of cognitive impairment in daily life was graded using CDR sum of boxes (CDR-SB) and level of cognitive performance impairment was graded using neuropsychological test scores. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 77 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Post-stroke cognitive impairment: high prevalence and determining factors in a cohort of mild stroke

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD 2014-01-01

Because of the aging population and a rise in the number of stroke survivors, the prevalence of post-stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) is increasing. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 280 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Four sensitive screening tools to detect cognitive dysfunction in geriatric emergency department patients: brief Alzheimer's Screen, Short Blessed Test, Ottawa 3DY, and the caregiver-completed AD8

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine 2011-04-01

Cognitive dysfunction, including dementia and delirium, is prevalent in geriatric emergency department (ED) patients, but often remains undetected. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 163 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Validation of neuropsychological tests for the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study Harmonized Cognitive Assessment Protocol

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. International psychogeriatrics 2019-07-16

We recruited 825 individuals from the CHARLS sample and 766 subjects from hospitals in six provinces and cities in China. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 825 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Conversion between mini-mental state examination, montreal cognitive assessment, and dementia rating scale-2 scores in Parkinson's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society 2014-11-07

Cognitive impairment is one of the earliest, most common, and most disabling non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease (PD). 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 360 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Prevalence of cognitive impairment: results from the MRC trial of assessment and management of older people in the community

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Age and ageing 2005-05-01

The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is recommended to test for cognitive impairment and to monitor medication response. 4 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 7,073 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Longitudinal change in cognitive performance among individuals with mild cognitive impairment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100. Neuropsychology 2007-03-01

The authors used mixed-effects growth models to examine longitudinal change in neuropsychological performance over a 4-year period among 197 individuals who were either normal or had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) at baseline. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 33 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the mini-mental state examination as screening instruments for cognitive impairment: item analyses and threshold scores

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders 2011-01-29

135 subjects enrolled in a longitudinal clinicopathologic study were administered the MoCA by a single physician and the MMSE by a trained research assistant. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 135 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Limitations of the Mini-Mental State Examination for screening dementia in a community with low socioeconomic status: results from the Sao Paulo Ageing & Health Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience 2008-06-16

The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is the most widely used instrument for the screening of cognitive impairment worldwide, but its ability to produce valid estimates of dementia in populations of low socioeconomic status and minimal literacy skills has not been adequately established. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,933 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB): a factor analytic study of a large sample of normal elderly volunteers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Dementia (Basel, Switzerland) 1994-09-01

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

Severe impairment battery. A neuropsychological test for severely demented patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Archives of neurology 1994-01-01

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

Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery-dementia version (SNSB-D): a useful tool for assessing and monitoring cognitive impairments in dementia patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of Korean medical science 2010-06-17

The Seoul Neuropsychological Screening Battery (SNSB) is one of the standardized neuropsychological test batteries widely used in Korea. 4 key findings →

Participants: 43 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ Change the filters

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. Show only studies that are free to read

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 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.

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 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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed