27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Although poor sleep quality and extreme sleep durations have been associated with brain atrophy and dementia, it is unclear whether sleep disturbances contribute to neural injury in the absence of neurodegeneration and cognitive impairment. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A growing number of studies, in animal models and humans, have highlighted the link between sleep and Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review explores the interface between circadian timekeeping and the regulation of brain function by astrocytes. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Short sleep duration has been linked to the development of neurocognitive disorders. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This cycle is challenging to study, as its bidirectional nature renders cause difficult to disentangle from effect. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The global north is facing an unprecedented rise in the prevalence of neurodegenerative diseases. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
42 common genes were identified between OSA and dementia which were primarily linked to the G-coupled protein receptor (GPCR) and olfactory pathways. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sleep disorders are common in patients with Alzheimer's disease, and can even occur in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment, which appears before Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence on the relationship between sleep and cognition and present available data reporting the impact that sleep alterations may have on cognitive functions. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent epidemiological research has linked decline in multiple sensory functions with an increased risk of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Several causative factors are associated with hearing loss (HL) and brain disorders. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent studies have revealed a correlation between aging-related hearing loss and the likelihood of developing Alzheimer Disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Presbycusis contributes to cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
With the increasing number of older adults around the world, the overall number of dementia cases is expected to rise dramatically in the next 40 years. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In recent years, there has been increasing research interest in the correlation between hearing impairment and cognitive decline, two conditions that have demonstrated a strong association. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The deaf group showed considerably lower scores on the OPT, OLT, and Y-maze test than the control group. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Several studies identified hearing loss as a risk factor for aging-related processes, including neurodegenerative diseases, as dementia and age-related hearing loss (ARHL). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The progressive aging of the population will notably increase the burden of those diseases which leads to a disabling situation, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD) and ophthalmological diseases that cause a visual impairment (VI). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is consistent evidence that dementia affects driving ability. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease, characterized by memory loss and multiple cognitive impairments. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease is one of the most common age-related neurodegenerative disorders. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
During ageing, the prevalence of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and of cardiovascular disease CVD) increases. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Bariatric surgery has been shown to improve cognition in patients with severe obesity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The number of people living with dementia, such as Alzheimer's disease, is increasing worldwide. 3 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The number of people suffering from dementia in the world is progressively increasing due to the expansion of the geriatric population in which this clinical condition is more frequent. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
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 →