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

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 801–825 of 1,004 studies in Prevention and risk (page 33 of 41) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

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; 12,859 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.

Folic acid and L-5-methyltetrahydrofolate: comparison of clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Clinical pharmacokinetics 2010-08-01

There is a large body of evidence to suggest that improving periconceptional folate status reduces the risk of neonatal neural tube defects. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Cognitive reserve: implications for diagnosis and prevention of Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Current neurology and neuroscience reports 2004-09-01

Epidemiologic evidence suggests that higher occupational attainment and education, as well as increased participation in intellectual, social, and physical aspects of daily life, are associated with slower cognitive decline in healthy elderly and may reduce the risk of incident Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

EUROCARE: a cross-national study of co-resident spouse carers for people with Alzheimer's disease: I--Factors associated with carer burden

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. International journal of geriatric psychiatry 1999-08-01

There have, however, been few studies which have sought to investigate factors associated with carer burden and differences and similarities between countries. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Vascular risk factor detection and control may prevent Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Ageing research reviews 2010-04-10

The vascular hypothesis of Alzheimer disease (AD), first proposed by us in 1993, provides substantial evidence that suggests vascular risk factors (VRF) play a critical role in the development of cognitive decline and AD during aging. 1 key finding →

Evidence: high

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

Therapies for Prevention and Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. BioMed research international 2016-07-28

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia associated with a progressive neurodegenerative disorder, with a prevalence of 44 million people throughout the world in 2015, and this figure is estimated to double by 2050. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Diet, nutrition and the ageing brain: current evidence and new directions

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2018-01-10

Globally populations are ageing. By 2050, it is estimated that there will be two billion people aged 60 years or over, of which 131 million are projected to be affected by dementia, while depression is predicted to be the second leading cause of disability worldwide by 2020. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Associations Between Self-Reported Sensory Impairment and Risk of Cognitive Decline and Impairment in the Health and Retirement Study Cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences 2020-06-01

Self-assessed sensory impairment is independently associated with cognitive decline and incident possible CIND and probable dementia. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Precision to plate: AI-driven innovations in fermentation and hyper-personalized diets

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Frontiers in Nutrition 2025-09-04

The global food system faces unprecedented challenges, including climate-driven agricultural instability, rising malnutrition, and consumer demand for sustainable yet appealing products. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Effects of APOE4 on omega-3 brain metabolism across the lifespan

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Trends in endocrinology and metabolism: TEM 2024-04-12

Omega-3 (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), such as docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), have important roles in human nutrition and brain health by promoting neuronal functions, maintaining inflammatory homeostasis, and providing structural integrity. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in neurodegenerative disorders: Mixed designs = mixed results

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. Progress in lipid research 2025-09-19

Epidemiological studies consistently show an elevated intake of fish and long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), such as docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), reduces the risk of developing neurodegenerative diseases, particularly dementia and Alzheimer's disease. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Smoking Characteristics of Adults With Selected Lifetime Mental Illnesses: Results From the 2007 National Health Interview Survey

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. American Journal of Public Health 2010-10-22

The age-adjusted smoking prevalence of adults with mental illness or serious psychological distress ranged from 34.3% (phobias or fears) to 59.1% (schizophrenia) compared with 18.3% of adults with no such illness. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Alcohol drinking in middle age and subsequent risk of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in old age: a prospective population based study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. BMJ 2004-08-10

Participants who drank no alcohol at midlife and those who drank alcohol frequently were both twice as likely to have mild cognitive impairment in old age as those participants who drank alcohol infrequently. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.

1,032 records (3.8% 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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed