Evidence from well-planned, representative epidemiological surveys is scarce in many regions. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review 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.
Furthermore, hippocampal subfields susceptible to atrophy in AD were protected by PRT revealing an elimination of long-term atrophy in the left subiculum, and attenuation of atrophy in left CA1 and dentate gyrus when compared to SHAM+SHAM (p = 0.023, p = 0.020 and p = 0.027). 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study found that CT+Active tDCS did not produce greater memory improvement compared to CT+Sham tDCS. 5 key findings →
Participants: 68 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
SMART will provide a novel evaluation of the immediate and long term benefits of CT, PRT, and combined CT and PRT on global cognitive function and brain morphology, as well as potential underlying mechanisms of adaptation in older adults at risk of further cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It has been reported that social engagement may be associated with dementia risk. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases dementia risk with no pharmacologic treatment available. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
15 care sites with 289 residents were randomly assigned. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The trial was completed by 67% of patients in the placebo group and 73% of patients in the risperidone group. 3 key findings →
Participants: 345 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Data collected from clinical trials and cohort studies, such as dementia studies, are often high-dimensional, censored, heterogeneous and contain missing information, presenting challenges to traditional statistical analysis. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,037 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
67/100
The outcomes of each model of care differ and correspond to the model's focus. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
High levels of caregiver burden are present in a large proportion of caregivers of people with dementia and this increases over time for those without services. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 720 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
It is unclear what non-pharmacological interventions to prevent cognitive decline should comprise. 3 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The successful interventions identified included approximately nine to 12 sessions tailored to the needs of the person with dementia and the caregiver and were delivered individually in the home using multiple components over 3-6 months with periodic follow-up. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
64/100
Mild cognitive impairment is a syndrome defined as cognitive decline greater than expected for an individual's age and education level but that does not interfere notably with activities of daily life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
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
Of the participants, 342 (81.6%) had normal cognitive functioning, 58 (13.8%) had nonamnestic MCI, and 19 (4.5%) had amnestic MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 419 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Some CG interventions can reduce CG psychological morbidity and help people with dementia stay at home longer. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Effective counseling and support interventions can reduce symptoms of depression in caregivers when patients are taking donepezil. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive complaints are common in the elderly, and nearly one in three meet criteria for MCI. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,037 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While the role of diet and nutrition in cognitive health and prevention of dementia in older adults has attracted much attention, the efficacy of different dietary patterns remains uncertain. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Earlier NH admission of Australian compared to U.K. and U.S. subjects may be due to differences in health care, NH systems, availability, and affordability. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older people with diabetes receiving metformin have slower cognitive decline and lower dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,037 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Physical and cognitive exercise may prevent or delay dementia in later life but the neural mechanisms underlying these therapeutic benefits are largely unknown. 3 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Incidence rates for MCI are higher than previously reported, particularly in men and for single-domain MCI; rates for amnestic and nonamnestic MCI were comparable. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are common in dementia and in predementia syndromes such as mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 →