Median follow-up by intention to treat was 2.0 years. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,180 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
During 1 110 831 person-years at risk, we recorded 245 573 hospitalisations in the Finnish cohorts; the corresponding numbers in the UK study were 60 946 hospitalisations in 186 572 person-years. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 9,838 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Adherence to the Life Simple 7 ideal cardiovascular health recommendations in midlife was associated with a lower risk of dementia later in life. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 7,899 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
More frequent social contact at age 60 years was associated with lower dementia risk (hazard ratio [HR] for each SD higher social contact frequency = 0.88 [95% CI 0.79, 0.98], p = 0.02); effect size of the association of social contact at 50 or 70 years with dementia was similar (0.92 [95% CI 0.83, 1.02], p = 0.13 and 0.91 [95% CI 0.78, 1.06], p = 0.23, respectively) but not statistically significant. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 10,228 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multimorbidity (hazard ratio [HR] 4·12 [95% CI 3·41-4·98]), frailty (HR 2·38 [95% CI 1·93-2·93]), and disability (HR 1·73 [95% CI 1·34-2·22]) were associated with increased risk of mortality; these associations were not modified by socioeconomic status. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 308 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 12,327 patients who underwent randomization (6162 to the asundexian group and 6165 to the placebo group), the incidence of ischemic stroke was lower in the asundexian group than in the placebo group (6.2% vs. 8.4%; cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.84; P<0.001). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 12,327 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Female participants had a lower hazard of early-onset dementia compared with males (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·61-0·80]). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 544,442 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A distinct set of midlife depressive symptoms was associated with an increased risk of dementia, suggesting that these symptoms might be early markers of underlying neurodegenerative processes. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 5,811 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
14 IPD-Work studies were assessed and six studies were excluded due to missing outcome data and unavailable data for pooling, resulting in the inclusion of eight studies with 124 909 participants. 5 key findings →
Participants: 909 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 394,255 individuals including 184 incident cases of CD and 459 of UC after median follow-up of 13.6 years (4,889,910 person-years). 5 key findings →
Participants: 394,255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
56/100
The psychostimulant properties of caffeine appear to reduce cognitive decline in women without dementia, especially at higher ages. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The increasing number of people with dementia globally illustrates the urgent need to reduce dementia's scale and impact. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
'Covert' cerebral small vessel disease (ccSVD) is common on neuroimaging in persons without overt neurological manifestations, and increases the risk of future stroke, cognitive impairment, dependency, and death. 3 key findings →
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →