27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Implementation facilitation that engages clinicians under typical practice conditions can enhance evidence-based team processes; its effect on self-reported overall population health status was negligible, although health status improved for individuals with complex conditions and hospitalization rate declined. 5 key findings →
Participants: 5,596 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings indicate that high-speed resistance exercise training approaches are effective in improving cognitive function and physical performance in older adults with cognitive frailty. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Fewer than half of the older adults dispensed donepezil in Ontario would have been eligible to participate in the RCTs that established the efficacy of this drug. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,423 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Rates of cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are extremely heterogeneous. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 3,397 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
As a result, physicians struggle to interpret these models, and feel it is hard to trust them. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,048 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Benefits and risks of statins relative to neurological outcomes should be considered when prescribed for at-risk NDD populations. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 288,515 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with CKD could have an elevated dementia risk. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 37,049 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Where appropriate, we undertook subgroup analysis by modality (individual versus group), number of sessions and frequency, setting (community versus care home), type of control condition and dementia severity. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 37 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Randomized control intervention. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Deep learning, a state-of-the-art machine learning approach, has shown outstanding performance over traditional machine learning in identifying intricate structures in complex high-dimensional data, especially in the domain of computer vision. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has gained much interest in recent years for its ability to explain the complex decision-making process of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent research has revealed an association between hearing impairment and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 154,783 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Epidemiological aspects of Parkinson's disease (PD), co-occurring diseases and medical healthcare utilization of PD patients are still largely elusive. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 100,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There has been growing evidence showing gait variability provides unique information about gait characteristics in neurological disorders. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 777 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Differential diagnosis of dementia remains a challenge in neurology due to symptom overlap across etiologies, yet it is crucial for formulating early, personalized management strategies. 1 key finding →
Participants: 51,269 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The literature has several methodological limitations including lack of sufficient algorithm development descriptions and standard definitions. 1 key finding →
Participants: 255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) detects functional connectivity (FC) abnormalities that occur in the brains of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results revealed machine learning with novel biomarkers and multiple variables may increase the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The same daily ACB score was associated with a different degree of risk, depending on the ACB ratings of the individual drugs comprising the score. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 10,698 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Study objective To examine the risks and compare the occurrences of major long-term side effects (sexual dysfunction, bone fractures, diabetes, cardiovascular morbidity, acute myocardial infarction [MI], and dementia) in patients with prostate cancer who received androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with those who did not. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 201,797 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We identified a non-linear association of type 2 diabetes duration and the risk of dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 13,761 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings demonstrate the importance of community-based patient-centered care strategies for stroke survivors that address their range of health needs and prevent more costly acute care use. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 29,673 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although epidemiological and biochemical evidence suggests that aluminium may be associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), there is no convincing proof of a causal link for aluminium in disease progression. 4 key findings →
Participants: 48 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Therefore, we conducted a longitudinal study to examine whether PM2.5 affects the episodic memory decline, and also explored the potential mediating role of increased neuroanatomic risk of Alzheimer's disease associated with exposure. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 998 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We performed a systematic review of studies focusing on the automatic prediction of the progression of mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, and a quantitative analysis of the methodological choices impacting performance. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 172 Evidence: high
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 →