27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Supported by very low-to-moderate certainty of evidence, physical activity/exercise has a positive effect on several cognitive and noncognitive outcomes in people with MCI and dementia, but RCTs, with low risk of bias/confounding, are still needed to confirm these relationships. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 28,205 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fifty-one AD patients enrolled, mean age 73.5. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The construct of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) has evolved over the past 10 years since the publication of the new MCI definition at the Key Symposium in 2003, but the core criteria have remained unchanged. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among individuals presenting with SCD at a memory clinic, those with a biomarker profile A-T+N+, A+T-N-, A+T+N-, and A+T+N+ were at increased risk of dementia, and showed steeper cognitive decline compared to A-T-N- individuals. 4 key findings →
Participants: 385 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment is a syndrome defined as cognitive decline greater than expected for an individual's age and education level but that does not interfere notably with activities of daily life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The First Key Symposium was held in Stockholm, Sweden, 2-5 September 2003. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The field of aging and dementia is focusing on the characterization of the earliest stages of cognitive impairment. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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
The predictive validity of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) for identifying future Alzheimer disease (AD) cases is improved in the presence of anxiety symptoms. 1 key finding →
Participants: 185 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The models could aid clinicians in the interpretation of CSF biomarker and hippocampal volume results in individuals with MCI, and help research and clinical settings to prepare for a future of precision medicine in Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Participants: 883 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diabetes and pre-diabetes substantially accelerate the progression from MCI to dementia, and anticipate dementia occurrence by more than 3 years in people with MCI. 3 key findings →
Participants: 302 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The proportion of progressors was 11% (8/41), 34% (14/41), 56% (19/34), and 71% (60/85) in A-N-, A+N-, SNAP, and A+N+, respectively; the proportion of APOE ε4 carriers was 29%, 70%, 31%, and 71%, respectively, with the SNAP group featuring a significantly different proportion than both A+N- and A+N+ groups (p ≤ 0.005). 2 key findings →
Participants: 201 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
Across studies, MBI appears to be linked to specific neurobiological markers of AD, including Aβ and tau brain deposition, as well as alterations in the mesolimbic pathway and neurodegenerative and neuroinflammatory fluid biomarker levels. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent findings suggest that Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a disconnection syndrome characterized by abnormalities in large-scale networks. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Late-life depression (LLD) is associated with development of different types of dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 185 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Two-thirds of MCI-multidomains, but only half of MCI-amnestic progress to AD. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of the Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) as a screening test for dementia in an elderly Swedish population. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia poses an on-going Canadian challenge due to an aging population, with cases projected to rise significantly by 2050. 4 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. 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 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 →