Evidence from well-planned, representative epidemiological surveys is scarce in many regions. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Dementia and MCI are associated with neuropsychiatric symptoms in clinical samples. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 138 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The most common anticholinergic classes used were tricyclic antidepressants, first-generation antihistamines, and bladder antimuscarinics. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,434 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older adults with CVD other than stroke had a higher risk of dementia and AD than did those without CVD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,602 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our findings suggest that clinicians should consider sedative-associated, hypoxic, and septic delirium, which often co-occur, as distinct indicators of acute brain injury and seek to identify all potential risk factors that may impact on long-term cognitive impairment, especially those that are iatrogenic and potentially modifiable such as sedation. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,048 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADNI has demonstrated the feasibility and utility of multicenter PET studies and is helping to clarify the role of biomarkers in the study of aging and dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 100 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The development of MCI is associated with measurements of cognition and depression, racial and constitutional factors, and cerebrovascular disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 927 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older, healthy women with decreased circadian activity rhythm amplitude and robustness, and delayed rhythms have increased odds of developing dementia and MCI. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The preponderance of epidemiologic and tissue compositional studies supports a protective effect of omega-3 EFA intake, particularly eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), in mood disorders. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The pooled sample comprised 4657 participants (30% women) aged ≥ 60 years (mean age was 74 years at sleep assessment). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,374 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium is common, persistent, and independently associated with poor functional recovery 1 month after hip fracture even after adjusting for prefracture frailty. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In this community-based sample, 3 to 4% of nondemented persons met MCI operational criteria; despite increased risk of progressing to dementia, a substantial proportion also remained stable or reverted to normal during follow-up. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,248 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
61/100
Although beta-amyloid (Abeta) plaques are a primary diagnostic criterion for Alzheimer's disease, this pathology is commonly observed in the brains of non-demented older individuals. 5 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Twenty-two percent of the participants aged 75 years or older had MCI. 2 key findings →
Participants: 927 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Here, we investigated if TAR-DNA-binding protein-43 (TDP-43), the disease protein in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and ubiquitin inclusions with or without motor neuron disease as well as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also formed inclusions in Lewy body (LB) disorders including Parkinson's disease (PD) without or with dementia (PDD), and dementia with LBs (DLB) alone or in association with Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
50/100
, respectively (p-values < 0.05), with p-tau217 demonstrating the highest classification accuracy for Aβ-PET status (AUC = 0.94). 4 key findings →
Participants: 113 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of delirium were studied in 229 elderly patients. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
INTRODUCTIONDementia research in sub-Saharan Africa remains limited despite rapid population aging and substantial ancestral, environmental, and vascular diversity. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 102 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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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