27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We comprehensively estimated the risk of multiple morbidity across the lifespan in people with Down syndrome compared with the general population and controls with other forms of intellectual disability. 4 key findings →
Participants: 204 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with gout have a lower risk of developing dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 7,119 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The average total cost to Medicare of persons with a claims-based diagnosis of AD was $6021 versus $2310 (P < .001) for persons without a diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 10,858 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Different information sources yield widely varied prevalence and expenditure estimates. 1 key finding →
Participants: 57,669 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The use of methods that focus on determining a single underlying cause may lead to underestimation of the extent of the contribution of some diseases such as dementia and respiratory disease to death in older adults and overestimation of the contribution of other diseases. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Comorbidities in community-living older adults with dementia are common and account for a substantial proportion of health service use and costs in this population. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Claims data studies that include indicators of potentially diminished patient functional status better capture heterogeneity of patients with multiple chronic conditions. 1 key finding →
Participants: 72,056 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Due to complex relationships of body-mass index and blood pressure with dementia individual components cancelled each other out and rendered the sum-scores meaningless for the prediction of dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,547 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Changing instructions while maintaining the same cognitive and motor tasks on WWT in older adults result in task prioritization effects. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 189 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There was a significant intervention effect as hypothesized for participants with lower mastery at baseline on all three bother (p =.04), anxiety (p =.01), and depression (p =.007). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
One of the major symptoms of semantic dementia (or progressive fluent aphasia) is profound word-finding difficulties. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Machine learning and pattern recognition methods have been used to diagnose Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from individual MRI scans. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed three stages of activity during both visual picture naming and auditory naming to definition that were serially organized: sensory processing, lexical semantic processing, and articulation. 2 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The different anatomic distribution of the pathologic lesions could explain these results: opercular and subcortical regions in tau pathologies with progressive anarthria, the left frontotemporal cortex in TDP-43-positive frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD-TDP) with agrammatic progressive aphasia, the bilateral lateral and anterior temporal cortex in FTLD-TDP or argyrophilic grain disease with semantic dementia, and the left parietotemporal cortex in Alzheimer disease with logopenic progressive aphasia or jargon aphasia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The implementation represented radical innovation and required far more resources than the incremental changes anticipated by the participants. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the field of neurodegeneration, speech and language assessments are useful for diagnosing aphasic syndromes and for characterizing other disorders. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that dCDT is a suitable screening tool to identify early cognitive dysfunction. 1 key finding →
Participants: 381 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results revealed a universal applicability of the "A/T/N" framework in a Chinese population and established an optimal diagnostic model consisting of cost-effective and non-invasive approaches for diagnosing AD. 2 key findings →
Participants: 411 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our results demonstrate that unsupervised digital memory assessments might be used for diagnosis and prognosis in Alzheimer's disease, potentially in combination with plasma biomarkers. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Conversion rates increased with increasing CDR-SB scores. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,827 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is one of the most common neurological syndromes in the world. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,315 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite the increasing incidence and high morbidity associated with dementia, a simple, non-invasive, and inexpensive method of screening for dementia is yet to be discovered. 4 key findings →
Participants: 121 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We previously developed a novel machine-learning-based brain age model that was sensitive to amyloid. 3 key findings →
Participants: 757 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identify three distinct profiles: active healthy sleepers (AHS; 64.0%), fragmented poor sleepers (FPS; 14.1%), and long and frequent nappers (LFN; 21.9%). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For detecting AD-dementia, the ensemble model achieved the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.943 (95% confidence interval, 0.906-0.980), 0.786 (95% confidence interval, 0.673-0.899), and 0.795 (95% confidence interval, 0.716-0.874) in the internal validation, External-1, and External-2, respectively. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 190 Evidence: moderate
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 →