Systematic review of the literature using the American Academy of Neurology's evidence-based methods. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Alzheimer's dementia affects more than 40 million people worldwide with substantial increases in prevalence anticipated. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 24,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The AD8 is a brief, sensitive measure that reliably differentiates between nondemented and demented individuals. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study is the first to show that, 10 years before the clinical diagnosis of dementia, subjects who later developed dementia performed worse in complex activities of daily living, which may constitute an early marker of the disease. 2 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 104 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Classification resulted in 227 persons with prevalent dementia at entry into the study and 480 incident cases during follow-up. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 227 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia affect nearly all people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 587 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings highlight substantial disparities in the timeliness and comprehensiveness of dementia diagnosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 993 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Slow gait speed has been shown to predict incident dementia and cognitive decline in older individuals. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 57,456 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The CHS has developed a methodology for longitudinal studies of dementia in large cohorts and represents the largest study of dementia including cognitive testing, MRI and genetic markers. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 5,888 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
SCD can precede both AD and non-AD dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 2,978 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This comprehensive portrait of rural-urban differences in dementia care highlights possible geographically based inequities and can be used by researchers and decision makers to guide development of more equitable dementia care policies. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Forty-eight studies from 18,456 screened abstracts (Dementia: n = 2,516, Control: n = 1,224) met inclusion criteria for the systematic review. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 2,516 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
64/100
Twenty studies met inclusion criteria. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The sample included 47 100 Medicare beneficiaries (25 900 women [54.9%]; mean [SD] age, 72.2 [11.4] years). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 47 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 283,772 participants (mean [SD] age 64.62 [8.96] years; 56.7% women), 60.3% identified as non-Hispanic White and 13.3% as Hispanic/Latino. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 283,772 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 228 392 participants from UKB (n = 137 374; mean [SD] age at baseline, 62.5 [4.1] years; 53.8% female) and AOU (n = 91 018; mean [SD] age at baseline, 66.9 [7.8] years; 57.1% female), those with a history of a clinical exposure at baseline had higher dementia incidence rates compared with those without such history. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 137 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is type 1b evidence for gingko biloba in producing a modest benefit of cognitive function; cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of people with Lewy body disease (particularly neuropsychiatric symptoms); cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in treatment cognitive impairment associated with vascular dementia; and the effect of metal collating agents (although these should not be prescribed until more data on safety and efficacy are available). 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Behavioral prevention strategies can help maintain high levels of cognition and functional integrity, and can reduce the social, medical, and economic burden associated with cognitive aging and age-associated neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The study aims to assess the efficacy of the Big Brain Academy (BBA), a computerized cognitive training program (CT) based on video games, compared to the Integrated Psychostimulation Program (IPP), a classical CT tool for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Prevalence of swallowing difficulties in patients with dementia ranged from 13 to 57%. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study demonstrates that patients with dementia who suffer a hip fracture can benefit from multidisciplinary geriatric assessment and rehabilitation and should not be excluded from rehabilitation programs. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Many older people's crisis teams tend to focus on prevention and reducing psychiatric admissions. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Drivers with dementia are poorer drivers than cognitively normal drivers, but studies have not consistently demonstrated higher crash rates. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Without validated cutoff scores, it is impossible to employ tests in a standardized fashion in front-line clinical settings. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The effect of stroke on dementia incidence in the population is not explained by common risk factors. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
10 of the 1,233 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 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
- An evaluation of a community dementia screening program in rural Kenya: DEM‐SKY
- Dementia in China: epidemiology, clinical management, and research advances
- Cognitive Frailty in China: Results from China Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment Study
- Brain Health PRO: Evaluating a Web‐Based Multidomain Intervention to Improve Dementia Literacy and Self‐Efficacy
- Dementia in Sub-Saharan Africa: Risk factors, public perception, and management approaches
- Screening for dementia in primary care: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
- Modifiable lifestyle factors in dementia: a systematic review of longitudinal observational cohort studies
- Review of brief cognitive tests for patients with suspected dementia
- Sensitivity and specificity for dementia of population-based criteria for cognitive impairment: the MoVIES project
- Knowledge and practice of healthy behaviors for dementia and stroke prevention in a United States cohort
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 27,780 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.
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 27,780 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 →