Our findings indicate that HFOs likely arise from different neuronal populations and are generated through distinct mechanisms in these two models. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Our findings indicate that HFOs likely arise from different neuronal populations and are generated through distinct mechanisms in these two models. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Controlling for baseline differences, treatment of OSA improved delayed recall and may reduce the slope of memory decline in Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 86 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sleeping more than one’s usual average the night before testing was associated with better delayed memory ( β = 0.03, p = 0.02), while no between-person sleep effects emerged. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 329 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Specific disease clusters involving diabetes, oral disease, sensory impairment, and osteoporosis were associated with suspected dementia and neuropsychiatric heterogeneity, supporting integrated multimorbidity-oriented screening and care. 4 key findings →
Participants: 2,597 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) are associated with increased risk of neurodegenerative disease, including Alzheimer’s disease (AD); however, the mechanisms by which TBI promotes AD pathogenesis remain poorly understood. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sleep disruption is common in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Participants: 16 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
DORA-22 and MK-1064 rescued tauopathy-related sleep loss, and reduced agitation-like locomotion and stress-induced hyperthermic responses. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings indicate that the cognitive impact of hearing loss depends on structural resources, highlighting the need to integrate sensory health and social context in dementia prevention efforts. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,397 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings reveal marked geographic variation in dementia risk factors, highlighting the need for region-specific prevention strategies. 4 key findings →
Participants: 40,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ABR latencies, rather than amplitudes, showed significant associations with regional gray matter volumes. 5 key findings →
Participants: 88 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
All Big Five domains had prospective associations with multiple dementia risk factors and with cognitive impairment, cognitive function, and self-reported memory. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study evaluated hearing loss (HL) as a potential early indicator of dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 16,270 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Quantitative measures for tracking functional health have generally been lacking. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Crossmodal plasticity refers to the phenomenon by which typical sensory areas respond to stimulation in other sensory modalities when their main input is absent or reduced. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age-related hearing loss is a leading modifiable risk factor for dementia and is increasingly recognized as a non-motor feature of Parkinson’s disease (PD). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a main acquired risk factor for dementia, including Alzheimer disease (AD), but links are unknown. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Small palpebral fissure is an independent and previously unnoticed risk factor for glaucoma surgical failure, affecting both minimally invasive and filtration procedures. 3 key findings →
Participants: 339 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The impact of age and hearing loss on the brain has garnered significant attention, as both factors have been implicated in the development of cognitive impairment or dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age-related hearing loss (ARHL), or presbycusis, is one of the most prevalent sensory deficits in older adults and has been increasingly implicated in cognitive decline and dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Because deaths without a given condition differ in cause composition from deaths with it, each condition was also compared with deaths carrying another of the studied conditions: the dementia estimate strengthened to 1.050 (1.036–1.065), and cerebrovascular disease reached 1.018 (1.009–1.027), a smaller but statistically robust positive modification. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Partitioned-heritability studies have shown which tissues carry the heritability of complex traits, but whether the regulatory layer whose annotations are most informative for heritability within a tissue differs between traits has not been tested, because measured annotations for different layers come from different sets of biosamples. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MedCAT Comorbidity demonstrated predictive ability for mortality (HR 1.11 per condition), although the model fit was better using comorbidity from hospital admission data. 4 key findings →
Participants: 3,543 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Vascular dementia (VaD) is a prevalent and devastating neurocognitive disorder characterized by profound white matter damage, yet the precise cellular mechanisms linking cerebrovascular stress to demyelination remain poorly understood. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Absolute BPV was associated with mortality, and DBP and MAP variability with overall stroke, after accounting for glycemic status and mean blood pressure. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 57,611 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Seasonally normalized 25(OH)D identifies a reproducible state of systemic vulnerability while reducing exposure misclassification caused by calendar timing of measurement. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 412,020 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 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