Alzheimer's disease currently has no cure and is usually detected too late for interventions to be effective. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Retail workers contribute to the daily wellbeing of customers, including those living with disabilities or diseases. 2 key findings →
Participants: 145 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed a relationship between residence in a more disadvantaged neighborhood (higher ADI) and lower rates of amyloid positivity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed a relationship between residence in a more disadvantaged neighborhood (higher ADI) and lower rates of amyloid positivity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The findings from this study provide clear evidence that there is a greater need for resources to support SC residents with ADRD and their caregivers in the Pee Dee and Upstate regions. 1 key finding →
Participants: 115,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We report that pan-neuronal expression of each ApoE allele induces lipid accumulation specifically in the brain, but not in the muscle. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Widespread delivery of AD‐modifying therapies will require a combination of strategies to communicate the value of detection and treatment to patients, integrate PCPs into the detection and diagnosis pathway, and address capacity disparities across the United States. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
is a rich source of valuable secondary metabolites, particularly terpene trilactones (TTLs) such as ginkgolides and bilobalides, which are obtained from the leaves and seeds of the plant. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In adjusted analyses, low vs. high livability was associated with higher dementia prevalence (B=0.38; p-value=0.31). 5 key findings →
Participants: 46 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These preliminary findings reveal white matter alterations associated with consensus MCI diagnosis and to socioeconomic differences in a clinical cohort of rural‐dwelling older adults. 5 key findings →
Participants: 69 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest differences in local cortical organization by neighborhood disadvantage, which also mediated the relationship between ADI and cognitive performance, providing a possible network‐based mechanism, explaining risk for cognitive decline and dementia associated with disadvantaged neighborhoods. 3 key findings →
Participants: 526 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest differences in local cortical organization by neighborhood disadvantage, which also mediated the relationship between ADI and cognitive performance, providing a possible network‐based mechanism, explaining risk for cognitive decline and dementia associated with disadvantaged neighborhoods. 3 key findings →
Participants: 526 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accessibility to food stores offering nutritious and affordable options is critical to ensure urban residents lead healthy lives. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
's < 0.05). The findings suggest that neighborhood-level social deprivation might influence memory and motor status, primarily through its impact on motor brain health. 1 key finding →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous research has found that living in a disadvantaged neighborhood is associated with poor health outcomes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Summary statistics were obtained for sociodemographic and chronic diseases by using cross-tabulation analysis and comparing the county respondents with proportion tests. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although White and non-White participants were both willing to test (∼77%), non-White participants were approximately four times more likely to test only if their results were not shared with their medical provider/insurer. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our study highlights the potential of Decipher‐AI for screening undiagnosed cognitive impairment in primary care. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADI was positively associated with blood pressure and cardiometabolic index (CMI), and negatively associated with global and Preclinical Alzheimer's Cognitive Composite (PACC5) scores, in cognitively unimpaired (CU) individuals. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
SDOH are potentially modifiable factors, therefore, a deeper understanding of their effects on ADRD can inform future interventions aimed at reducing ADRD prevalence and disparities. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Access is controlled through both technical and procedural methods and overseen by an external advisory committee Results Expo‐AD is currently storing personal identifiers and neuropathology data of 10,875 brain donors acquired from 22 participating brain banks and the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The model outperformed conventional ones, with an out-of-bag R2 of 74.8%. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Using multiple Medicare Public Use Files (PUF), including star ratings for home health quality of patient care (QoPC), home health care CAHPS survey (HHCAHPS), county-level ADRD prevalence, and Medicare FFS enrollment, we found that the median county-level number of home health agencies was 15 (IQR 8-29), star rating was 3.4 (IQR 3.1-3.7) for QoPC and 3.8 (IQR 3.5-4.0) for HHCAHPS. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study shows promise for clarifying the relationship between the social exposome and ADRD brain pathology post‐mortem. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall death rates in the US have been declining in the past few decades. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Where “Free full text” comes from
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
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
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.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomized / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multicenter collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
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 31,380 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.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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