28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among 10 095 participants (67.3% men; aged 35-55 years in 1985-1988), a total of 1710 cases of diabetes and 639 cases of dementia were recorded over a median follow-up of 31.7 years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 95 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The cohort study revealed that persistent HI significantly increased the risk of heart disease (P < 0.001, HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.31-2.03), stroke (P 0.004, HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.16-2.18), chronic lung disease (P 0.002, HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.17-1.99), and emotional, nervous, or psychiatric problems (P 0.016, HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.14-3.60). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 504,307 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Subjects experiencing multisensory impairments concurrent with visual impairment demonstrated a negative association with cognitive function. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 500,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this cohort study of US Medicare beneficiaries, dual sensory impairment was prevalent in older adults and associated with increased risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 7,562 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 8171 patients with late-life depression, 1443 (17.7 %) had TRLLD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,171 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Consistent with previous reports, risk factors and prodromal features associated with PD included traumatic brain injury, odds ratio (OR), 1.62; 95% CI, 1.36-1.92; alcohol misuse, OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.21-1.44; hypertension, OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.26-1.31; anosmia, OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.59-2.93; and parasomnias (including RBD), OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.42-1.84. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 345 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this study, hearing loss was positively associated with a risk of dementia, especially in patients aged 45 to 64 years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,135 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Central obesity in midlife increases risk of dementia independent of diabetes and cardiovascular comorbidities. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,049 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Females with MCI exhibited greater baseline GMV than males primarily in the thalamus, caudate, cerebellum, postcentral gyrus, and middle cingulate gyrus, with no differences at the AD stage. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 593 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Baseline subjective cognitive decline and low cognitive reserve significantly increased the risk of dementia, after 2 years of follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,099 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 27 857 participants (mean [SD] age at baseline, 61 [10] years; 15 747 female participants [56.5%]; 19 249 non-Hispanic White participants [69.1%]), 4105 (14.7%) developed dementia during the follow-up period (mean [SD], 10.2 [5.6] years). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 857 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults with hearing loss are at greater risk of dementia than those with normal hearing. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 7,865 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age-related hearing loss is linked to loneliness and poorer cognitive health, but it remains unclear whether loneliness helps explain associations between hearing difficulties and cognitive performance or dementia, and whether these patterns reflect causal pathways or shared underlying liability. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 10,375 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Both HL and depression are independent risk factors for eventual conversion to dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 8,529 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We have found evidence of a positive association between residential levels of air pollution across London and being diagnosed with dementia, which is unexplained by known confounding factors. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 978 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
HI and VI at baseline were reported by 30.3% and 16.6% of individuals, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,497 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 32,901 (1.12%) participants developed dementia, of which 74.4% and 11.0% were attributable to Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia, respectively, during the median follow-up of 5.5 years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,930,816 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The cognitive reserve (CR) hypothesis posits that individuals can differ in how their brain function is disrupted by pathology associated with aging and neurodegeneration. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 490 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Excluding participants with prevalent dementia, n = 1,161 individuals were included. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,161 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 952 participants (mean age at first neuropsychological assessment = 69±8 years, 62% women, 17% Black, 13% white, 68% Hispanic), 24% developed MCI/dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 952 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
10-year average (SD) PM2.5 from death across the autopsy cohort was 8.2 (1.9) μg/m3. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 832 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
During the follow-up period, we identified a total of 617 incident neurodegenerative diseases, 301 PD and 182 AD. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 617 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previously increased blood pressure may increase the risk for dementia by inducing small-vessel disease and white-matter lesions. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 382 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our findings support the hypothesis that depression is a risk factor for dementia and suggest that recurrent depression is particularly pernicious. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,239 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sleep duration had an inverted U-shape relationship with cognitive scores (P <.001); and sleep quality had a positive linear relationship with cognitive scores (P <.001). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 10,768 Evidence: moderate
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →