It has been suggested that patients undergoing treatment with recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) may develop cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Although computerized cognitive training (CCT) is an effective digital intervention for cognitive impairment, its dose-response relationship is understudied. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,709 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients in the experimental group showed a significant improvement in various neuropsychological domains due to the training, and these effects decreased after 12 months. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The rapidly increasing worldwide population of older adults, along with the increasing prevalence of cognitive impairment and dementia in this population, is a growing health-care problem. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A smartphone application collected 2 modalities of cognitive data, digital voice and screen-based behaviors, from the FHS (Framingham Heart Study) multigenerational Generation 2 (Gen 2) and Generation 3 (Gen 3) cohorts. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 455 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This paper describes the protocol for a randomized comparative effectiveness study of behavioral interventions to prevent or delay dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 300 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We describe the use of rapid cycle tests of change to pretest and develop a Carers Assistive Technology Experience Questionnaire for a survey of informal carers of persons with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The study will provide a foundation for a fully powered clinical trial for the smartphone app-based intervention to reduce stress, depression, and anxiety among family caregivers of people with dementia in Vietnam. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The high costs of institutional care and the burdensome demands of home care are challenging for families of adults with dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Demographic and clinical characteristics between individuals with aMCI defined by the Inbrain CST and CERAD-K were not significantly different. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 166 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Consent comprehension quiz scores were high (mean 97.33%, SD 6.86% correct), and training sessions lasted on average 17.93 (SD 6.89) minutes. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 44 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A number of context, implementation and mechanism of impact factors were identified, which might explain these results and may inform interpretation of the pending RCT main effect results. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
70/100
Common genetic variance in apolipoprotein E (APOE), β-glucocerebrosidase (GBA), microtubule-associated protein tau (MAPT), and α-synuclein (SNCA) has been linked to cognitive decline in Parkinson's disease (PD), although studies have yielded mixed results. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 281 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
70/100
These data suggest that resveratrol decreases CSF MMP9, modulates neuro-inflammation, and induces adaptive immunity. 3 key findings →
Participants: 119 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis of narrowly defined CCT across clinical populations with depression. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The slow progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) poses a challenge for the quantification of early disease-driven cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 152 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The CDR+NACC FTLD global score interacted with time on battery percentage such that participants with prodromal or symptomatic FTLD demonstrated less change in battery percentage throughout the day (a proxy for less smartphone use) than clinically normal participants (P<.001 in both cases). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 94 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mailings are cost-effective, but direct contact improved recruitment. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MoCA was administered to 274 patients from 2 prospective hospital-based cohort studies in Germany (n = 125) and France (n = 149). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 125 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PE-treated patients performed significantly better than placebo for the co-primary endpoints: change from baseline of Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL; P = .03; 52% less decline) with a trend for Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-Cog; P = .06; 66% less decline) scores at month 14. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vascular cognitive impairment without dementia is very common among the aged and tends to progress to dementia, but there have been no proper large-scale intervention trials dedicated to it. 4 key findings →
Participants: 281 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Vitamins and minerals play multiple functions within the central nervous system which may help to maintain brain health and optimal cognitive functioning. 4 key findings →
Participants: 28 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this single-center observational study, we included all individuals who visited the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam and had a clinical diagnosis of subjective cognitive decline (SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or probable AD dementia and were A+. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 520 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Stratification by self-reported recovery revealed that deficits were only detectable in SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals who did not feel recovered from COVID-19, whereas individuals who reported full recovery showed no deficits. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,737 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These three main clusers were confirmed in a testing sample. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 9,804 Evidence: moderate
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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events