The majority of community-dwelling older persons have brain pathology. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 80 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Alzheimer's dementia is significantly more common in women than in men. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 971 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Each level increase in the severity of atherosclerosis or arteriolosclerosis was associated with significantly higher odds of Alzheimer's disease dementia (odds ratio [OR] for atherosclerosis 1·33, 95% CI 1·11-1·58; OR for arteriolosclerosis 1·20, 1·04-1·40). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,143 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Subjects were 404 persons in the Religious Orders Study, a cohort study of aging, who underwent annual clinical evaluations, including 19 neuropsychological tests from which 5 cognitive domain and global summary scores were derived, and brain autopsy at time-of-death (mean age-at-death 86). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 404 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black decedents with AD dementia are more likely to have mixed brain pathologies compared with age-, sex-, education-, and cognition-matched white decedents with AD dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 122 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diabetes mellitus may be associated with an increased risk of developing AD and may affect cognitive systems differentially. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 151 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is commonly associated with more than 1 neuropathology, usually Alzheimer disease with cerebrovascular pathology. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 179 persons (average age, 86.9 years) with probable AD, 87.7% had pathologically confirmed AD, and 45.8% had mixed pathologies, most commonly AD with macroscopic infarcts (n = 54), followed by AD with neocortical LB disease (n = 19) and both (n = 8). 1 key finding →
Participants: 54 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A brain transcriptomic profile for healthy diets revealed novel genes potentially associated with cognitive health. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,204 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Late-life lower BMI relates to faster rates of decline in cognition, specifically semantic memory and episodic memory, in both blacks and whites. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,134 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We examined the association of type 2 diabetes mellitus to function in different cognitive systems in older black and white persons. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,437 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We developed prediction rules to guide the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in two community-based cohort studies (the Religious Orders Study and the Rush Memory and Aging Project). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Religious Orders Study is a longitudinal clinical-pathologic cohort study of aging and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Subjects were 233 older Catholic clergy in the Religious Orders Study, who underwent detailed annual evaluations, including neuropsychological testing, and brain autopsy at time of death (mean age 86 years, 45% men). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among 428 older autopsied persons (mean age at death = 91 years, 70% women) considered for anti-amyloid treatment eligibility assessment, 58% had MCI and 42% had mild-stage Alzheimer dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We determined whether oxidative stress is an early event in the pathogenesis of sporadic Alzheimer disease (AD), and correlated oxidative stress with neuropsychological functions and neurofibrillary pathology in AD and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Considerable overlap has been identified in the risk factors, comorbidities and putative pathophysiological mechanisms of Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRDs) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), two of the most pressing epidemics of our time. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Microinfarcts are common, and persons with multiple cortical microinfarcts have higher odds of dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →