27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
A total of 6321 participants (mean [SE] age, 56.1 [0.18] years at visit 1; n = 4077 women [57.8%]) were included. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 4,077 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Aging is characterized by cognitive decline affecting daily functioning. 3 key findings →
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
There was no significant difference between the two groups in baseline age, sex, illiteracy, years of education, and scores on the K-MMSE, CDR, SNSB-II, and K-MBI. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cohort studies suggest that the Mediterranean diet is associated with better global cognition in older adults, slower cognitive decline and lower risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 249,511 Evidence: moderate
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
There is emerging evidence linking fruit and vegetable consumption and cognitive function. 5 key findings →
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
The SYNERGIC Trial will establish the efficacy and feasibility of a multimodal intervention to improve cognitive performance and mobility outcomes in MCI. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review aimed to evaluate the effects of multi-domain interventions on cognition among individuals without dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 10,056 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals with multi-domain amnestic mild cognitive impairment (md-aMCI) have an elevated risk of dementia and need interventions that may retain or remediate cognitive function. 1 key finding →
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
Furthermore, hippocampal subfields susceptible to atrophy in AD were protected by PRT revealing an elimination of long-term atrophy in the left subiculum, and attenuation of atrophy in left CA1 and dentate gyrus when compared to SHAM+SHAM (p = 0.023, p = 0.020 and p = 0.027). 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Hippocampal volume is a marker of brain health and is reduced with aging and neurological disease. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 23 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on the current evidence, rTMS was an effective therapy for cognitive impairment in AD. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 240 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recruitment of 2600 older people (≥65 years) at increased risk of cardiovascular disease will take place in the Netherlands, Finland and France. 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Given projected increases in dementia prevalence, emphasising earlier stages of cognitive impairment in older adults enables targeted early intervention strategies. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 4,120 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive decline in aging is a pressing issue associated with significant healthcare costs and deterioration in quality of life. 4 key findings →
Participants: 15 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
CCT is efficacious for overall and key cognitive domains in adults with MS, but efficacy on other outcomes and in progressive subtypes remains unclear. 2 key findings →
Participants: 982 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Computerized cognitive training significantly improved global cognitive function, which was supported by the improved brain plasticity. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study found that CT+Active tDCS did not produce greater memory improvement compared to CT+Sham tDCS. 5 key findings →
Participants: 68 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
SMART will provide a novel evaluation of the immediate and long term benefits of CT, PRT, and combined CT and PRT on global cognitive function and brain morphology, as well as potential underlying mechanisms of adaptation in older adults at risk of further cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advancing age increases the risk for diseases and health concerns like cognitive decline, constituting a major public health challenge. 1 key finding →
Participants: 631 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 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.
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 →