30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The FINGER MRI exploratory sub-study did not show significant differences between the intervention and control groups on changes in regional brain volumes, regional cortical thicknesses, or WML volume after 2 years in at-risk elderly without substantial impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 132 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
111,485 articles were initially retrieved; 288 full articles were reviewed and 89.6% subsequently deemed ineligible due to exclusion of participants with co-existence of dementia and Parkinsonism. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 16 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's dementia (AD) is the sixth leading cause of death in the U.S., with an estimated $305 billion cost of care in 2020. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 604 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A 2-year lifestyle intervention was able to maintain the daily functioning of the at-risk older population. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,260 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
CCT proved effective in PD-MCI patients when compared with traditional PCT. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 53 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Combined multi-domain interventions may contribute to preventing or delaying disease progression. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 33 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The 2-year multidomain FINGER intervention may modulate white matter microstructural alterations. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 34 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Systematic cognitive training had no effect on global cognition or HRQoL in community-living persons with mild to moderate dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 147 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In a large dementia prevention trial with 6-year follow-up, dropout was associated with older age, poorer cognitive function, symptoms of depression, and disability at baseline. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,994 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Relative to HC, the participants with cTBI had lower CAC (0.10 ± 0.03 vs 0.12 ± 0.03 mm 2 /mm Hg, P = .046) and higher CVR (0.17 ± 0.03 vs 0.15 ± 0.03 mm Hg/mL/min, P = .028). 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Outcomes from this trial support the conduct of a larger and longer trial with this participant group. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 57 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
If results from this study show benefits for cognition at trial completion, CCT programs, alone or in combination with walking, might be a strategy to promote healthy cognitive aging in older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this pilot study, RFM and the multi-domain approach CPR were feasible and had preliminary beneficial effects in older adults with MCI in primary care setting in Hong Kong. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive training involving speed of cognitive processing has the potential to delay the diagnosis of ADRD. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,021 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The traditional Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) has shown beneficial effects on cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 522 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study gives evidence that cognitive training may be effective to prevent cognitive decline and onset of MCI in PD patients. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Aerobic exercise combined with computerized cognitive training has better effects on the cognitive functional status of survivors of stroke than an active control. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A 26-wk group-based exercise program combined with dual-task training improved GCF in community-dwelling older adults without dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 44 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Present results suggest that repeated cycles of CT in patients with AD treated with ChEIs are associated with benefits in several areas of cognitive function. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 16 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This is the first randomized controlled trial with supervised moderate-to-high intensity exercise in patients with mild AD. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 200 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
They provide initial evidence that cognitive training may be an efficacious approach toward improving balance and gait in older adults known to have a history of falls. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 45 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, to replace existing nonpharmaceutical treatment training protocols, VR platforms need significant improvement if they are to appeal to older people with symptoms of cognitive decline and meet their specific needs. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This trial that enlist the support of private enterprises will lead to the creation of new services for dementia prevention as well as to verify the effectiveness of multi-domain interventions for dementia prevention. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite differences in CVR management within the countries considered, it was possible to design and implement the HATICE multidomain intervention. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Preliminary findings of our pilot study suggested that cognitive decline in psychomotor speed and executive function is possibly prevented by intradialytic CT and ET. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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