An estimated 8.8 million Indians older than 60 years have dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,528 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
An estimated 8.8 million Indians older than 60 years have dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,528 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The cohort sample included 5058 beneficiaries with dementia (mean [SD] age, 85.5 [8.0] years; 3038 women [60.1%]; 809 [16.0%] non-Hispanic Black, 357 [7.1%] Hispanic, and 3892 non-Hispanic White respondents [76.9%]). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,058 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
When diagnosed, non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics may have more advanced dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,966 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 34 349 participants, 19 378 individuals who were free of stroke and dementia and had longitudinal BP, cognitive, and covariate data were included in the analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 349 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Depression and external locus of control partially mediate racial/ethnic differences in memory trajectories. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 10,173 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This cohort study using pooled data from 6 cohort studies found that incident MI was not associated with a decrease in global cognition, memory, or executive function at the time of the event compared with no MI but was associated with faster declines in global cognition, memory, and executive function over time. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 30 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although the association between high blood pressure (BP), particularly in midlife, and late-life dementia is known, less is known about variations by race and sex. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,003 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Larger gains in rural adults' cognitive functioning between 2000 and 2010 that are linked with increased educational attainment demonstrate long-term public health benefits of investment in secondary education. 4 key findings →
Participants: 16,386 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The number of older adults with dementia in the US and globally is projected to increase as a result of population aging and growth. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 16 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Study objectives To examine associations between positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy, adherence and incident diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease (AD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia not otherwise specified (DNOS) in older adults. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,057 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Age-related increases in dementia risk can be attributed to accumulation of multiple pathologies, each of which contributes to dementia risk. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Prior studies have analyzed the burden of cognitive impairment, but often use potentially biased prevalence-based methods or measure only years lived with impairment, without estimating other relevant metrics. 3 key findings →
Participants: 29,304 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While a growing body of evidence points to potentially modifiable individual risk factors for dementia, the built and social environments in which people develop and navigate cognitive decline are largely overlooked. 2 key findings →
Participants: 21,151 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 1999, 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.2-18.1) of patients with dementia were using atypical or conventional antipsychotics. 3 key findings →
Participants: 254 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The finding of similar prevalence estimates for depression in men and women was not consistent with prior research that has shown a female predominance. 3 key findings →
Participants: 851 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over a mean follow-up of 14.6 years, 7.7% of the participants (n = 614) developed dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 7,960 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Index participants averaged 71.9 years, with > 50% lacking formal education. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,309 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The median age of participants was 79 years, 69% (31 of 45) were of non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity, and 60% (27 of 45) had attended at least some college. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common type of dementia among individuals 65 or older. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Half of the participants were over 70, with no formal education. 5 key findings →
Participants: 567 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This paper reports on a Conference organized by the Washington University School of Medicine's (WUSM) Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC), entitled "Enhancing Participation by Minoritized Groups in Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementia (ADRD) Research." 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black caregivers reported shorter sleep duration but lower daily pain than White caregivers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 210 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
average annual dementia incidence in White, but not Black, adults (1% versus 0%), due to hypertensive individuals' greater survival, and reduce annual ASCVD events more in Black than White adults (13% versus 5%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study predicts how sociodemographic trends-smaller family sizes, increased longevity, and marital patterns-could affect family care for people with dementia through 2060. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black participants had low (vs high) OP, which predicted worse episodic memory and global cognition (4% to 7% mediated). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,040 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 965 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