Retention intervals of at least three days were needed to evidence significant forgetting at both recognition and paired-associate recall test. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Currently, computerized batteries are of great value in detecting cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The focus of this review is on driving neuroplasticity in a positive direction using evidence-based interventions that also have the potential to improve general health. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older patients with dementia and delirium are more prone to adverse events in hospital, but formal cognitive assessment to identify these vulnerable patients on admission is often not carried out by junior doctors. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study aimed to develop a psychometrically valid touch screen tablet-based cognitive test battery to identify early cognitive impairment due to dementia in older adults. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The hippocampus is closely tied to spatial navigation, a central component in cognitive functioning, and critically involved in age-associated cognitive decline and dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
According to the existing literature, subjecting patients to various neuro-rehabilitative conditions within 3D virtual environments, allows them to obtain significant therapeutic benefits in which both transferability and durations over time are observed, in relation to the training period of the intervention. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The aforementioned technology-based interventions may represent practical means for supporting people with Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mean scores for the HSI group increased on cognitive assessments, where mean scores for the LSI group saw decline, or stability. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a dementia syndrome characterized by peculiar behavioral changes arising from frontotemporal involvement and distinct from Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The purpose of this study was to describe the recognition and management of delirium in hospitalized patients with and without dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The MoCA Solo is emerging as a reliable and efficient tool for assessing cognitive impairment in older adults. 3 key findings →
Participants: 40 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Both V3 width and plasma Hcy concentration were negatively correlated with MoCA scores in PD (r=-0.358, P<0.001; r=-0.187, P=0.013, respectively). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After 5 years, 666 (86.8%) individuals were followed up. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
LPA supported a three-profile solution: (1) lower depressive symptoms with moderate anxiety (33%), (2) severe combined depression and anxiety (18%) and (3) moderately severe depression with severe anxiety (49%). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An increasing number of individuals in our population are surviving to over 90 years and a subset is at risk for developing dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PFT is longer at CDR-SB ≤ 2.0 (1-2 years) and shorter at CDR-SB ≥ 5 (≤ 0.33) in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative cohort. 5 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
36/100
No statistically significant differences emerged between SDW and GW groups regarding baseline demographics, cognitive function, ADL, or neuropsychiatric symptoms. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The four- and seven-class clustering solutions achieved high variance overlap with published microstate templates. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A higher GPF was associated with better cognitive function in institutionalized older adults with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Pathophysiological differences separating small vessel disease (SVD) from Alzheimer's disease (AD) may alter treatment approach. 3 key findings →
Participants: 14 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were weak or no correlations between the KICA-Cog and other cognitive assessment tools. 5 key findings →
Participants: 49 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The current study provides evidence that more nuanced, data‐driven approaches can reveal commonalities in the etiology and underlying neurobiology of individuals across traditional categories of CU, MCI, or AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 515 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent neuropsychological studies suggest that, in addition to prominent mnemonic dysfunction, attentional impairments are a core feature of Alzheimer disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The purpose of this article is to identify the cognitive deficits commonly associated with geriatric depression and describe their clinical significance. 1 key finding →
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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%), 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.
1,038 records (3.6% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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 →