27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Use of VR in hospitalized patients significantly reduces pain versus a control distraction condition. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Depression is an accepted risk factor for dementia, but it is unclear if this relationship is causal. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 388 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, whether large perivascular spaces (L-PVSs) (>3 mm in diameter) visible on MRI are associated with SVD and cognitive deterioration in older individuals is unknown. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,612 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sporadic cerebral amyloid angiopathy is a common, well-defined small vessel disease and a largely untreatable cause of intracerebral haemorrhage and contributor to age-related cognitive decline. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The CNS is protected by the immune system, including cells that reside directly within the CNS and help to ensure proper neural function, as well as cells that traffic into the CNS with disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Brain capillary endothelial cells form the blood-brain barrier (BBB), which is covered with basement membranes and is also surrounded by pericytes and astrocyte end-feet in the neurovascular unit. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cerebral amyloid angiopathy is diagnosed in stroke units after lobar intracerebral hemorrhage. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
For women who initiate HT more than 10 or 20 years from menopause onset or are aged 60 years or older, the benefit-risk ratio appears less favorable because of the greater absolute risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, venous thromboembolism, and dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The critical role of the vasculature and its repair in neurological disease states is beginning to emerge particularly for stroke, dementia, epilepsy, Parkinson's disease, tumors and others. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
With increase in life expectancy, the number of persons suffering from common age-related brain diseases, including neurodegenerative (e.g., dementia) and cerebrovascular (e.g., stroke) disease is expected to rise substantially. 5 key findings →
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 →