Previous studies have suggested that systemic viral infections may increase risks of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
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.
Females had higher rates of positive amyloid PET visual reads (63% vs. 59%, P < 0.001) and higher Centiloids (CLs; median 48.7 vs. 36.8, p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
Participants: 10,361 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Median follow-up was 7.5 years (interquartile range: 7.0 to 9.0 years), during this time 387 participants (0.8 %) were diagnosed with dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 47,371 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among all participants, 247 (11.7%) had IADL limitations at baseline, and 151 (7.1%) developed dementia during follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,118 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Late-life depression (LLD) has been linked to increased likelihood of dementia, although mechanisms responsible for this association remain largely unknown. 3 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Outdoor activity is linked to lower dementia risk, particularly in those living in more accessible GS. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 187,724 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
This study analyzed 13 yr of follow-up data from 188,594 participants to assess the relationship between CWP and cognitive outcomes, while exploring the mediating effects of brain structure and systemic inflammation. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 500,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Population-based evidence directly linking liver diseases to brain disorders is limited, and its genetic and biochemical associations remain unclear. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 59 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
) had a 14% increase in the rate of dementia incidence (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.23; P <.001), and each standard deviation (SD) decrease in eBMD was associated with a 49% increase in dementia risk (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.19-1.86; P <.001). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 131,030 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over 13.45 years, 992 all-cause dementia cases were recorded. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 118,963 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Seizures in people with dementia (PWD) are associated with faster cognitive decline and worse clinical outcomes. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 490 783 participants, 21 468 (47.6% women) experienced an incident sepsis hospitalization. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 783 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the leading cause of dementia, characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-beta (Aβ) and neurofibrillary tangles. 4 key findings →
Participants: 16 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher AD PRS was associated with increased risks of all-cause dementia (HR: 1.75, 95% CI: 1.70-1.79, P < 0.001) and AD (HR: 2.02, 95% CI: 1.95-2.09, P < 0.001), with stronger effects in women for both outcomes when considering the main AD PRS which was related to APOE4 status. 4 key findings →
Participants: 249 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 43,160 participants were included (mean [standard deviation] age, 64.2 [7.7] years, 53.1 % female). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 43,160 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MASLD was significantly associated with smaller volumes of total grey matter and subcortical grey matter (p < 0.05) and reduced Alzheimer's disease (AD)-signature cortical thickness (multivariable-adjusted β = -0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.07, -0.01). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 29,195 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
51/100
We identified all participants in the UK Biobank cohort study diagnosed with HF prior to enrolment or during follow-up, who had disease occurrence data available from both primary and secondary care records (n = 9824). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 9,824 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings highlight the altered phases of swallowing in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 158 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The final sample included 1196 cases (505 PD, 26 APD, 476 AD, 189 ALS) and 44,107 control subjects. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,196 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The analysis included 121 521 participants (mean age: 55.7 years; 53.5% women), followed for a median of 10.9 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 121 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Odds ratios for death, dementia, and delirium using anticholinergic-polypharmacy pseudoscales (median = 1.09-1.10) were greater than those of general-polypharmacy pseudoscales (1.05-1.06). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
49/100
Of 164,508 eligible participants, 6605(4%) had cognitive testing scores consistent with MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Long sleep was associated with reduced overall cognitive function (β ± standard error = -0.25 ± 0.07, p < 0.001), with strongest effects in those with depressive symptoms using (-0.74 ± 0.30, p = 0.017) and not using antidepressants (-0.60 ± 0.26, p = 0.024). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
High LDL-C (≥160 mg/dL) increased AD risk across all groups {hazard ratio (HR): 1.23 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10-1.38],p<0.001;HR: 1.45 (95% CI: 1.08-1.93),p=0.013;HR: 1.25 (95% CI: 1.10-1.42),p<0.001, respectively}, whereas low LDL-C (<70 mg/dL) showed higher VD risk in those not taking cholesterol-lowering medication [HR: 3.02 (95% CI: 1.73-5.27),p<0.001].Low HDL-C (≤40 mg/dL) was associated with increased AD and VD risk in non-users. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Midlife hearing loss was associated with smaller brain volumes, accelerated decline in executive function, accelerated accrual of white matter abnormalities, and a near doubling of dementia risk, suggesting a potential causal or biomarker role for midlife hearing loss in the prevention of late‐life dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,656 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 →