Nine studies with a total of 44,004 participants met the inclusion criteria. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 44,004 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Broad consensus emerged on the protective role against dementia of leisure activities. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 26 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Metformin might correlate with a lower dementia incidence in people with T2DM. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,463,100 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Forty-one studies were included. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Systematic review of the literature using the American Academy of Neurology's evidence-based methods. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results confirm the absence of a neurocognitive risk associated with statin treatment and suggest a potential favourable role of statins. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PE improves global cognitive function (SMD = 0.348 [95 % CI 0.166 to 0.529]; p = 0.0001), executive function (SMD = 0.213 [95 % CI 0.026 to 0.400]; p = 0.026) and delayed recall (SMD = 0.180 [95 % CI 0.002 to 0.358]; p = 0.047). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,077 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A total of 20 relevant studies involving 44,893 individuals were included in the analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 42,955 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We reviewed epidemiological and experimental studies of female gonadal hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on cognitive function in post-menopausal women and carried out meta-analyses. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Nutrition is an important modifiable risk factor that plays a role in the strategy to prevent or delay the onset of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD) in older adults has been identified as a risk factor for dementia, although the literature is inconsistent, and it is unclear which factors moderate progression from SCD to dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The past and ongoing increase in midlife obesity prevalence will contribute significantly to the future prevalence of dementia and public health measures to reduce midlife obesity are simultaneously primary prevention measures to reduce the risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This meta-analysis highlights sleep management as a pivotal modifiable factor in reducing the risk of all-cause cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A growing body of evidence suggests that adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MD) may protect against cognitive decline and dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
62/100
Based on analysis of prospective and nonprospective studies, NSAID exposure was associated with decreased risk of Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Level of evidence Level V, systematic review. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There are cross-sectional evidences of an association between sleep disorders and cognitive impairment on older adults. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Evidence suggests that vegan and vegetarian diets, when well planned, can be rich in phytonutrients and antioxidants, which have been associated with lower levels of inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We have reported, for the first time, the dose-response relationship between LTPA and dementia, further supporting the international PA guideline from the standpoint of dementia prevention. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Physical exercise, aerobic exercise in particular, benefits global cognition in MCI patients. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Agriculture in Nigeria, Kenya, and Mali is impacted by droughts, necessitating resilient crops and improved irrigation. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our results provide additional evidence that depressive symptoms determine an additive risk effect to the progression to dementia in subjects with MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Antihypertensive treatment significantly improved cognitive function scores (SMD, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.03-0.09; P Conclusions and implications Antihypertensive therapy significantly improves cognitive function with moderate certainty evidence, supporting its use for cognitive protection in older adults with hypertension. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 16,823 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The review demonstrates accumulating evidence supporting health behavioral effects in reducing the risk of cognitive decline and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Obesity promotes carcinogenesis through interlocking metabolic, inflammatory, immune, and hormonal pathways. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
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