alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Research

30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 751–775 of 980 studies in Prevention and risk marked Peer-reviewed (page 31 of 40) · 30,580 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Other subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,054 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Prevention and risk” covers

Prevention and risk — What might lower the risk of dementia — and what happened when those things were properly tested.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Gender Diversity and Environmental, Social, and Governance: Unlocking Solutions to Corporate Risk

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Business Strategy & Development 2025-03-01

The findings indicate that stronger ESG practices significantly reduce corporate risk, enhance financial stability, and mitigate regulatory and market volatility exposure. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Gut microbiota and associated metabolites: key players in high-fat diet-induced chronic diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Gut Microbes 2025-04-22

Excessive intake of dietary fats is strongly associated with an increased risk of various chronic diseases, such as obesity, diabetes, hepatic metabolic disorders, cardiovascular disease, chronic intestinal inflammation, and certain cancers. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Validation of a MIND diet screener in older adults

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2025-10

MIND diet scores from the screener showed strong positive correlation (r = 0.71, ρ = 0.70, p < 0.001) and comparable ranking ability (63% correctly classified, 1% grossly misclassified, kw = 0.67) compared to those from the FFQ, as well as significant associations with nutrient profiles. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Nutrition and immunology in mental health: Precision medicine and integrative approaches to address unmet clinical needs in psychiatric treatments

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Brain, behavior, and immunity 2019-09-27

The 'monoamine hypothesis' is insufficient in approaching the aetiology of psychiatric disorders or in developing novel therapies. 2 key findings →

Participants: 15 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Identifying the elderly at risk for malnutrition. The Mini Nutritional Assessment

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Clinics in geriatric medicine 2002-11-01

In community-dwelling elderly persons, the MNA detects risk of malnutrition and life-style characteristics associated with nutritional risk while albumin levels and the BMI are still in the normal range. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Ageing and diabetes: implications for brain function

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. European journal of pharmacology 2002-04-01

Diabetes mellitus is associated with moderate cognitive deficits and neurophysiological and structural changes in the brain, a condition that may be referred to as diabetic encephalopathy. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Risk factors for hip fracture in men from southern Europe: the MEDOS study. Mediterranean Osteoporosis Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA 1999-01-01

The aims of this study were to identify risk factors for hip fracture in men aged 50 years or more. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

White matter changes in dementia: role of impaired drainage of interstitial fluid

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) 2015-01-01

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

Omega-3 fatty acids and dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Prostaglandins, leukotrienes, and essential fatty acids 2009-06-12

More than a dozen epidemiological studies have reported that reduced levels or intake of omega-3 fatty acids or fish consumption is associated with increased risk for age-related cognitive decline or dementia such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

High-fat diet-induced deregulation of hippocampal insulin signaling and mitochondrial homeostasis deficiences contribute to Alzheimer disease pathology in rodents

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Biochimica et biophysica acta 2015-05-21

Global obesity is a pandemic status, estimated to affect over 2 billion people, that has resulted in an enormous strain on healthcare systems worldwide. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Mediterranean diet and cognitive function in older adults

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care 2010-01-01

A high adherence to the Mediterranean diet has been associated with slower cognitive decline, with reduced risk of mild cognitive impairment conversion to Alzheimer's disease and with reduced risk of Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ Change the filters

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