Significant study-site, specimen type, and batch effects were observed. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 604 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Dementia is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 33,995 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The task force issued five statements related to the management of anxiety, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption in adults admitted to the ICU. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Forty-five studies involving over 730 000 participants were included. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this sample of 101 219 patients, 52.7% were women and mean age was 62.6 years (SD, 9.3 years) as of November 1, 2016. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 101,219 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This randomized trial followed 2,111 older adults at risk for cognitive decline across 5 US sites for two years, comparing a highly structured lifestyle program (regular exercise, MIND diet, cognitive/social engagement, health coaching) against a lower-intensity, self-guided version of the same components. 4 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 2,111 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This long-term follow-up of the SPRINT randomized trial tested whether intensively lowering systolic blood pressure (to below 120, vs. the standard target of below 140) reduces the risk of thinking problems in adults 50+ with hypertension. 4 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 9,361 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
133 systematic reviews (2,724 RCTs and 258 279 participants) were included. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 279 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among older adults at risk of cognitive decline and dementia, a structured, higher-intensity intervention had a statistically significant greater benefit on global cognition compared with an unstructured, self-guided intervention. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,056 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neurotropic herpesviruses may be implicated in the development of dementia 1-5 . 1 key finding →
Design: cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
African heritage diets are increasingly being replaced by Western-style dietary patterns because of urbanization, economic development, increased access to processed foods, globalization and changing social norms. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The search over five databases identified 898 articles, with 26 meeting the inclusion criteria. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Observationally, CVDs were associated with risk of all incident outcomes in meta-analyses, with hazard ratios up to 7.00 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.20, 7.92). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 10,373 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Enrolment took place between March 2023 and May 2023. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 4,533 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Adult vaccinations, particularly against herpes zoster, influenza, pneumococcus and Tdap, are associated with a lower risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 104,031,186 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
69/100
We found no significant association for exposure to nitrogen oxides (five studies, n=241 409, pooled adjusted HR per 10 μg/m 3 increase, 1·05 [0·97-1·13]; I 2 =44%), PM 10 (four studies, n=246 440, pooled adjusted HR per 15 μg/m 3 increase, 1·52 [0·80-2·87]; I 2 =82%), or annual ozone (four studies, n=419 972, pooled adjusted HR per 45 μg/m 3 increase, 0·82 [0·35-1·92]; I 2 =69%), with moderate to considerable heterogeneity between studies in these pooled analyses. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 24,030,527 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MPF (%WC, −2.06 (95% confidence interval (CI), −2.99, −1.13) and UPF (%WC, −1.05 (95% CI, −1.98, −0.13)) resulted in weight loss, with significantly greater %WC on MPF (Δ%WC, −1.01 (95% CI, −1.87, −0.14), P = 0.024; Cohen’s d , −0.48 (95% CI, −0.91, −0.06)). 2 key findings →
Participants: 55 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
68/100
A total of 5 071 935 participants were included from 27 studies; approximately 49.2% of participants were female, and 14 studies were conducted in Asia, 7 in North America, 3 in Europe, and 3 in Oceania, represented by Australia. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 935 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
APPLE-Tree is an accessible intervention associated with small improvements in cognition, although these results were not statistically significant. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings provide robust evidence supporting the protective effect of the Mediterranean diet against stroke. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Review of the evidence and recommendations are provided for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, fracture-risk assessment and intervention thresholds, management of vertebral fractures, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, including duration and monitoring of anti-resorptive therapy, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, as well as models of care for fracture prevention. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 172 patients were included (86 each in the sotatercept and placebo groups). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 172 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among eligible participants (n = 705,061), 264,294 individuals (37.5% of eligible participants) initiated any statin during 2001-2010 ("initiators"), of whom 249,613 (94.4%) were matched with 255,937 unique noninitiators to create the analytic sample (322,358 unique participants; mean age at baseline = 67.4 years; 55.1% female). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 322,358 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No significant association was found between MHT use and risk of mild cognitive impairment or dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,016,055 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
= 0.04). Replacing 1 serving per day of nuts and legumes for processed red meat was associated with a 19% lower risk of dementia (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.75-0.86), 1.37 fewer years of cognitive aging (95% CI -2.49 to -0.25), and a 21% lower risk of SCD (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68-0.92). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
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 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 →