The 172 total participants had a mean (SD) age of 75.7 (4.8) years, and 108 (62.8%) were women. 4 key findings →
Participants: 172 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The findings suggest that risk factors associated with ADRDs have changed over the past decade and differ based on sex and race and ethnicity. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 378 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants had a mean age of 73.4 years; 62.7% were women, and 34.9% were Hispanic or nonwhite. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 126 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a significant public health challenge and may have greater incidence among older adults from underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 90 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of these, 4361 (8.4%) developed dementia compared with 6610 patients with NTT (5.9%) (P Conclusions and relevance Among patients evaluated in the ED or inpatient settings, those with moderate to severe TBI at 55 years or older or mild TBI at 65 years or older had an increased risk of developing dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 164,661 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 4267 participants with probable dementia in HRS, the mean (SD) age was 82.2 (7.6) years, 2930 (survey-weighted 69.4%) were female, and 785 (survey-weighted 12.1%) identified as Black. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,404 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among military veterans, mTBI is associated with 56% increased risk of PD, even after adjusting for demographics and medical/psychiatric comorbidities. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 325,870 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this cohort study of more than 350 000 veterans, even mild TBI without LOC was associated with more than a 2-fold increase in the risk of dementia diagnosis. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 178 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Depressive symptoms were associated with increased risk of MCI, and this association was independent of underlying vascular disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,220 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In a study of nearly 190,000 older US military veterans, those who had experienced a traumatic brain injury were about 57% more likely to develop dementia over the next 9 years than veterans without a brain injury history. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 188,764 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
65/100
Most studies have focused on dementia and suicidal behavior, with inconsistent results. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 21 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The eRADAR tool uses existing EHR data to detect patients with good accuracy who may have unrecognized dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 4,330 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Depressive symptoms in midlife or in late life are associated with an increased risk of developing dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The late-life dementia risk index accurately stratified older adults into those with low, moderate, and high risk of developing dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 480 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The final Dementia Screening Indicator included age (1 point/year; ages, 65-79 years), less than 12 years of education (9 points), stroke (6 points), diabetes mellitus (3 points), body mass index less than 18.5 kg/m(2) (8 points), requiring assistance with money or medications (10 points), and depressive symptoms (6 points). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →