27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The impact of cognitive impairment on activities of daily living (ADL) is being used as a major criterion for differentiating between mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Reliability of quantitative gait assessment while dual-tasking (walking while doing a secondary task such as talking) in people with cognitive impairment is unknown. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The regression models showed that older age, education levels, language spoken at home and in country of birth, socioeconomic status (SES), occupation, sex, and presence of a mood disorder made significant and unique contributions to performance on the MMSE. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,792 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The objective of this study is to examine the discrepancy between single versus age and education corrected cutoff scores in classifying performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack. 4 key findings →
Participants: 919 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) marks a transitional stage between healthy aging and dementia, but the understanding of MCI in the general population remains limited. 4 key findings →
Participants: 4,198 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Cognitive impairment and late-life depression are associated with increased risk for subsequent dementia; however, investigations of these phenomena appear to be proceeding along separate tracks. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The mean (SD) age of the 4,631 participants was 67.6 (4.89) years, and 2579 (55.7%) were women. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 4,943 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No model terms met the a priori cut-off beyond the base model, including device type, response input source (e.g. mouse, etc.), or session interference. 5 key findings →
Participants: 167 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MEG 16-38Hz spectral power, particularly over parieto-occipital magnetometers, was significantly reduced in the AD progression group. 5 key findings →
Participants: 117 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The rate of reversion from MCI to normal cognition was 37.0% after 2 years and 32.9% after 12 years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,262 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The 3D-CAM-S severity scores correlated with DRS, delirium duration, and biomarkers of delirium. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 177 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This validated nomogram incorporating clinical, biochemical, and neuroimaging biomarkers provides a robust tool for individualized PSCIND risk assessment in first-ever MIS patients, with potential to guide targeted interventions and cognitive monitoring. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 137 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BIOFACE is a two-year study of clinical, cognition, and biomarkers that will shed light on the physiopathology and the potential utility of plasma and NPEs as non-invasive early diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in people younger than 65 years. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multiple sclerosis is a chronic, demyelinating disease of the CNS. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive decline is a broad syndrome ranging from non-pathological/age-associated cognitive decline to pathological dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data from four studies were used to assess the psychometric properties of the 26 IQCODE items. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study examined the validity of the four standard psychological paradigms that have been operationally defined within the CogState brief computerized cognitive assessment battery. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia remains under-diagnosed in the elderly population. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence and pattern of neuropsychological impairment in cohorts of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals across pre- and post-HAART (highly active antiretroviral therapy) eras. 3 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Anxiety symptoms in aMCI predict conversion to AD, over and beyond the effects of depression, memory loss, or atrophy within AD neuroimaging biomarkers. 3 key findings →
Participants: 376 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, MMSE scores exhibited ceiling effects, poor test-retest reliability, limited sensitivity to subtle brain abnormalities, and a high rate of intrusion elsewhere in the neuropsychological battery. 5 key findings →
Participants: 99 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The purpose of the study was to provide characterization of Mexican Americans who meet criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 3 key findings →
Participants: 633 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Incidence rates of cognitive impairment and dementia are rising with the ageing population. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
On clinical data, this innovative approach for early diagnosis might provide more insight into pathophysiological processes underlying degenerative changes, as well as toward a personalized risk evaluation for pharmacological, nonpharmacological, and rehabilitation treatments. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BrainCheck Memory assessments were significantly correlated to the SLUMS exam, with coefficients ranging from .5 to .7. 5 key findings →
Participants: 398 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
9 of the 846 studies in this tag, 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 9. The same 9 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →