28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The first single-stage individual patient data meta-analysis from randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials provides evidence to support benefits of antihypertensive treatment in late-mid and later life to lower the risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 28,008 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With no effective treatments for cognitive decline or dementia, improving the evidence base for modifiable risk factors is a research priority. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 48,522 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We also determined the extent to which sex, educational attainment, and apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (APOE*4) carrier status were associated with decline. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 42,170 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Higher adherence to a MedDiet was associated with lower dementia risk, independent of genetic risk, underlining the importance of diet in dementia prevention interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 60,298 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Little is known on how risk factors of younger cohorts will play out in the future burden of multi-morbidity (two or more concurrent long-term conditions). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 303,589 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
LATE-NC is a common TDP-43 proteinopathy, associated with an amnestic dementia syndrome that mimicked Alzheimer's-type dementia in retrospective autopsy studies. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Greater understanding of the risk factors and mechanisms of incident dementia in stroke survivors is needed for prevention and management. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 355 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In total, 1,234 articles were identified from the search; 21 articles met inclusion criteria. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cross-sectional associations support the view that enhancing cognitive reserve may benefit cognition, and maintenance of cognitive health may be supported by a healthy and active lifestyle, in later life. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Alzheimer type of dementia and stroke are known to increase at comparable rates with age. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Epidemiological studies identify midlife hearing loss as an independent risk factor for dementia, estimated to account for 9% of cases. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MBI may be an earlier marker of neurodegenerative disease than MCI, captured at the stage of subjective cognitive decline or before, raising the possibility that MBI represents a novel target for dementia clinical trials or prevention strategies. 3 key findings →
Participants: 9,931 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is receiving increasing attention from governments and politicians. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The global burden of ischaemic strokes is almost 4-fold greater than haemorrhagic strokes. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Though results of pivotal studies in early (prodromal/mild) Alzheimer's disease are awaited, results to date in more established (mild to moderate) Alzheimer's disease have been equivocal and no disease modifying agents are either licensed or can be currently recommended for clinical use. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The 12 risk factors account for 60.3% of dementia cases in China, including 14.0% in early life, 8.8% in midlife, and 37.5% in later life. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Increasing evidence suggests that vascular risk factors contribute to neurodegeneration, cognitive impairment and dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
An international expert panel convened to evaluate nutrition-based approaches to brain health and dementia prevention. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a leading health policy challenge, with cases expected to triple by 2050, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
White matter abnormalities on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are associated with dementia and include white matter hyperintensities (WMH; also termed leukoaraiosis) and visible perivascular spaces (PVS). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The integrity of the vascular system is essential for the efficient functioning of the brain. 1 key finding →
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 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.
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 →