27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Higher MCI prevalence was identified in community-dwelling older adult populations in China compared with some other countries, possibly due to more broadened criteria being adopted for confirming the diagnosis. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 112,632 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study provides a quantitative synthesis of the prospective associations between personality traits (neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness) and the risk of incident Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 30,036 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Random-effects models revealed small but statistically significant effects with better psychological well-being in African American caregivers compared with white caregivers in both population-based (d = -0.22) and convenience sample studies (d = -0.21). 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 159 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence of MCI in China was 15.4%, which varied by demographics, lifestyles, morbidity, screening tools, and diagnostic criteria. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 123,766 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A total of 243 participants were enrolled, 81 of which had a recent ischemic stroke. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 243 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
We aimed to inform planning by assessing intrinsic capacity prevalence, by characterising the target group, and by validating the general approach-testing hypotheses that DIC was consistently associated with higher risks of incident dependence and death. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 17,031 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Head injury was associated with risk of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3-1.57), with evidence of dose-response (1 head injury: HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.13-1.39, 2+ head injuries: HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.86-2.46). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 14,376 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that decreasing disparities between sexes in education, due to secular increases in educational opportunities, could attenuate sex differences in dementia risk and cognitive decline in the future. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 924 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This review highlights that air pollutions, especially PM 2.5 and NO 2 play important role in the risk for age-related cognitive impairment and dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Evidence to date suggest there are ethnic differences in risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 12 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Social determinants of health, including neighborhood factors, play a key role in the health of diverse older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 452 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most studies have focused on dementia and suicidal behavior, with inconsistent results. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 21 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Depression is linked to an increased risk of cognitive decline and dementia; therefore, failing to diagnose and treat LLD in later life may have significant health implications. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 31,464 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with men, women had decreased risk of any LEA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.34 [95% CI, 0.31-0.37]). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this diverse community-based cohort, cross-sectional data revealed significant race/ethnic disparities in the prevalence of MCI and dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 989 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The ASDIR for ADRD was higher for women (17.0 per 1000 person-years) than for men (15.3) and varied across African Americans (22.9 in women, 21.5 in men), Native Hawaiians (19.3, 19.4), Latinos (16.8, 14.7), Whites (16.4, 15.5), Japanese Americans (14.8, 13.8), and Filipinos (12.5, 9.7). 5 key findings →
Participants: 16,410 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this large cohort of older adults, long-term PM2.5 exposure was associated with increased dementia incidence. 3 key findings →
Participants: 541 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Beneficiaries had an average age of 75.3 years and were predominately female (59%) and non-Hispanic whites (93%). 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,002 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although, anatomical disparities of the rodent medial prefrontal cortex compared to the primate homologue are apparent, current rodent models have effectively implicated the medial prefrontal cortex as a neural substrate of cognitive decline within ageing and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study did not find evidence to suggest that the ratio of dementia risk across Black and White individuals changed in the US between 2000 and 2016. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
HZ vaccination is associated with reduced risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 136,016 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Blacks and Hispanics were more prone to falsely positive perceptions of their cognitive function in the presence of cognitive impairment than non-Hispanic Whites. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,096 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite lower dementia prevalence, Black participants with dementia had more dementia risk factors, as well as greater cognitive impairment and neuropsychiatric symptom severity than White participants. 1 key finding →
Participants: 5,700 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In India, increasing lifespan and decreasing fertility rates have resulted in a growing number of older persons. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study 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 →