27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Frequent consumption of fruits and vegetables, fish, and omega-3 rich oils may decrease the risk of dementia and Alzheimer disease, especially among ApoE epsilon 4 noncarriers. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,085 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Higher adherence to a Mediterranean diet was associated with slower MMSE cognitive decline but not consistently with other cognitive tests. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 99 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This approach, describing the 14 years preceding dementia, provides a clear illustration of the particularly long and progressive prodromal phase of AD, and shows the successive emergence of cognitive deficits, depressive symptoms, and functional impairment during this phase. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 350 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
The NINCDS-ADRDA and the DSM-IV-TR criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are the prevailing diagnostic standards in research; however, they have now fallen behind the unprecedented growth of scientific knowledge. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Conventionally defined MCI has reasonable predictive value and specificity for AD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,265 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Inclusion of instrumental activities of daily living restriction in the criteria of mild cognitive impairment improves the prediction of dementia and the stability of this status over time. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,517 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is classically defined as a dual clinicopathological entity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Better knowledge of the preclinical phase of Alzheimer's disease would be an important advance to allow earlier treatment of this ominous disease. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,050 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Six thousand thirty community-dwelling persons aged 65 to 95. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Higher adherence to a Mediterranean diet (MeDi) and n-3 PUFA may both contribute to decreased dementia risk, but the association between MeDi adherence and lipid status is unclear. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,050 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The psychostimulant properties of caffeine appear to reduce cognitive decline in women without dementia, especially at higher ages. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
It has been postulated that oxidative stress may play a key role in dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,367 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
AMI is the first French longitudinal study on health and aging set up in a population of elderly farmers living in rural area through a multidisciplinary approach. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This olive oil-cognition association needs to be confirmed by further studies. 3 key findings →
Participants: 6,947 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The four IADL score could be incorporated into the screening procedure for dementia in elderly community dwellers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A high adherence to the Mediterranean diet has been associated with slower cognitive decline, with reduced risk of mild cognitive impairment conversion to Alzheimer's disease and with reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive decline may lead to dementia whose most frequent cause is Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The purpose of this review was to update available knowledge on the relationship between adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MeDi) and cognitive decline, risk of dementia or Alzheimer's Disease (AD), and to analyse the reasons for some inconsistent results across studies. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →