27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In this study, G. biloba at 120 mg twice a day was not effective in reducing either the overall incidence rate of dementia or AD incidence in elderly individuals with normal cognition or those with MCI. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,587 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with placebo, the use of G. biloba, 120 mg twice daily, did not result in less cognitive decline in older adults with normal cognition or with mild cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,545 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Circulating NfL and GFAP may, independently and jointly, provide useful clinical insight regarding dementia risk and prognosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,712 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE ϵ4 allele is a strong risk factor across the LBD spectrum and occurs at an increased frequency in pDLB relative to PDD. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 244 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
The development of MCI is associated with measurements of cognition and depression, racial and constitutional factors, and cerebrovascular disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 927 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Future research should examine whether minimizing drawbacks at the pre-imaging stage has adverse consequences on results disclosure. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 59 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
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
In particular, systemic inflammation, vascular inflammation, and altered endothelial function may play roles in domain-specific cognitive decline of nondemented individuals. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,159 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Brain atrophy with aging was observed in supratentorial and infratentorial areas, as well in primary motor, sensory, and heteromodal association regions. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 33 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this cohort study, statin therapy was not associated with a decreased risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,798 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These results help explain the "obesity paradox" as differences in dementia risk across time are consistent with physical changes in the trajectory toward disability. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,798 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Twenty-two percent of the participants aged 75 years or older had MCI. 2 key findings →
Participants: 927 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Plasma A beta levels are affected by age and by systemic and CNS vascular risk factors. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 55 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 Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) is a validated clinical instrument for evaluating psychopathology in dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
However, whether large perivascular spaces (L-PVSs) (>3 mm in diameter) visible on MRI are associated with SVD and cognitive deterioration in older individuals is unknown. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,612 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using cutoffs established from a control cohort, we found that 14 (54%) patients had increased levels of PiB retention and were considered "amyloid-positive." 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Vascular disease in the brain is prevalent among incident dementia cases. 1 key finding →
Participants: 3,375 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Obesity is associated with lower brain volumes in cognitively normal elderly subjects, but no study has yet investigated the effects of obesity on brain structure in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 399 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This cross-sectional study examines relationships among the constellation of psychiatric syndromes in Alzheimer's disease (AD) as a function of dementia severity in 1155 patients with probable AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,155 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These data suggest that having both diabetes and APOE epsilon4 increases the risk of dementia, especially for AD and mixed AD. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Trajectory modeling of longitudinal cognitive and behavioral data may provide enhanced resolution of phenotypic variation in AD. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
None of the clinical criteria for VaD identified the same group of subjects. 2 key findings →
Participants: 52 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →