Overall, 92% of patients had one or more dementia-related behaviors. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,776 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The results suggest that APOE epsilon4 and heavy drinking and heavy smoking lower the age of onset for AD in an additive fashion. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 397 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The prevalence of dementia in this population is similar to that reported from other areas in mainland China and Taiwan with aging being a significant risk factor. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 16,095 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
. Longitudinally, older age (OR=1.14 [1.06-1.22], p<.001), higher levels of p-tau217 (OR=10.37 [3.00-35.02], p<.001) and higher neuropsychiatric symptoms (OR=1.19 [1.02-1.39], p=.023) were associated with higher odds of progression to dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 104 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A registry of the University of Washington Alzheimer's Disease Research Center Satellite. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 371 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These cross-sectional data provide evidence that tHcy is a risk factor for white matter damage. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 259 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study shows that a minority of Dutch physicians find it conceivable that they would grant a request for EAS from a patient with psychiatric disease, dementia or a patient who is tired of living. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,456 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Apparent better health in Daxing might be explained by under-diagnosis, under-reporting or selective mortality. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,002 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Immigrant status may have complex effects on dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 7,609 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Cross-sectional study, Health, Aging and Body Composition data (1999/2000). 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Prevalence of dementia subtypes in China is comparable with that in Western countries. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 99 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
53/100
BPSD are universally present, bear correlates with dementia type and severity, and cause significant caregiver distress. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 107 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Directives to forgo hospitalization for U.S. NH residents with advanced dementia are uncommon and are associated with the organizational features of the facilities caring for them and the intensity of end-of-life care practiced in the region, as well as individual resident characteristics. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 91,521 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A cross-sectional study of geriatric patients was performed to provide a comprehensive description of the prevalence and clinical characteristics of chronic itch affecting Hispanic geriatric subjects in Mexico. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 302 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence of dementia in this rural Tanzanian population is similar to that reported in high-income countries. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,198 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
As ADRD deaths at home increase, the need for caregiver support and home-based palliative care may become more critical. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
NIH Conferences21 June 2005National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Management of Menopause-Related SymptomsFREENIH State-of-the-Science Panel*NIH State-of-the-Science Panel*Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-142-12_Part_1-200506210-00117 SectionsAboutVisual AbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail National Institutes of Health (NIH) consensus and state-of-the-science statements are prepared by independent panels of health professionals and public representatives on the basis of 1) the results of a systematic literature review prepared under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), 2) presentations by investigators working in areas relevant to the conference questions during a 2-day public session, 3) questions and statements from conference attendees during open discussion periods that are part of the public session, and 4) closed deliberations by the panel during the remainder of the second day and the morning of the third. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Health care aides frequently report care that is rushed and tasks omitted due to lack of time. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 583 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our findings suggest that poor chewing ability is associated with cognitive impairment or dementia in the elderly living in rural area. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 295 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For non-Indigenous peoples, the crude and age-standardised (World Health Organization standard) prevalence of dementia was 10.6 and 7.4 per 1000 persons, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One-third of adults with neurological conditions in China have low health literacy, with pronounced socioeconomic and geographic disparities. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,120 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher NIH Toolbox Friendship scores predicted less episodic memory decline. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
When considering race/ethnicity, the presence of more vascular comorbidities drove greater vulnerability. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although essential tremor (ET) is considered the most prevalent adult movement disorder, the available information on its prevalence and distribution worldwide is not completely understood. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,278 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Higher arterial stiffness and pulsatility were associated with MCI and dementia in white participants. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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