27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This study suggests that violence is a significant phenomenon and that all health workers, especially nurses, are at risk of suffering aggressive assaults. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In a preliminary effort to improve the early diagnosis of dementia, we developed a regression-based method for estimating premorbid intelligence measured by the ability to read irregular words from the American version of the Nelson Adult Reading Test (AMNART). 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Understanding variability in conceptions of dementia in multiethnic populations is important to improve care and guide research. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated cognitive impairment, a significant cause of morbidity, affects up to 30% of HIV-infected people. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In individuals without a prior diagnosis of cognitive impairment, the prevalence of dementia was low, but the prevalence of CIND was high. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Early increases in plasma NfL may reflect early white matter microstructural changes prior to dementia in DS. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) have an increased risk of developing Alzheimer disease (AD), with nearly all individuals exhibiting AD neuropathology, including amyloid beta (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles (NFT), by age 40 years. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 98 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The community-based Rotterdam Study, the Netherlands. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 31 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Subtype and Stage Inference (SuStaIn) is an unsupervised learning algorithm that uniquely enables the identification of subgroups of individuals with distinct pseudo-temporal disease progression patterns from cross-sectional datasets. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A comprehensive outcome monitoring system to monitor the quality and safety of care and variation for HCP recipients was developed. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 68 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older age was associated with greater odds of abnormal p-Tau217 (odds ratio [OR] 1.08 per year, 95% CI 1.07–1.09), as was APOE ε4 carrier status (OR 3.32, 95% CI 2.65–4.17). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,798 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Female gender, older age, and lower levels of education were associated with poorer overall test scores. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early detection of cognitive decline in older adults is essential for implementing timely interventions. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 90 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One hundred and fifty rules were found for caregivers with a moderate to severe burden, and these rules can be further summarized into twenty general rules. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 585 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Having three or more vascular risk factors (odds ratio = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [1.04-1.47]), actively smoking (odds ratio = 1.54, 95% confidence interval [1.29-1.82]), being overweight (odds ratio = 1.46, 95% confidence interval [1.22-1.74]), and having diabetes (odds ratio = 1.29, 95% confidence interval [1.09-1.53]) were associated with higher odds of subjective cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
cBF volume declined at comparable rates in iRBD-to-PD and iRBD-to-DLB converters, but atrophy was more severe at DLB phenoconversion. cBF atrophy correlated with attention, executive, and memory deficits. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Little is known about the dysbiosis of the gut microbiome in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) potentially at risk for the development of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 14 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
< 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis identified right hippocampal MD and t-tau as optimal classifiers for AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundOdor identification deficits predict Alzheimer's disease (AD) in epidemiological studies. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 600 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
To the Editor: The standardized management of pain–agitation–delirium (PAD) represents a fundamental component of clinical practice in intensive care units (ICUs).[1] Evidence-based analgesia and sedation strategies not only alleviate patients’ physiological discomfort and psychological distress, but also significantly reduce mechanical ventilation duration, improve long-term prognosis, and optimize healthcare resource allocation.[1,2] Equally crucial is delirium management, as evidenced by studies demonstrating that delirium duration independently predicts mortality risk, hospital stay length, healthcare expenditures, and acquired dementia incidence.[3] Although existing studies have explored PAD management practices, most rely on clinicians’ subjective recall that may distort objective clinical realities and fail to reflect distinctive characteristics.[4] Therefore, this nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study, initiated by the Critical Care Analgesia and Sedation Quality Control Subspecialty Group under the China National Center for Medical Quality Control in Critical Care Medicine, aims to investigate the current status of PAD management in China. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,627 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fourteen articles met inclusion criteria after critical appraisal. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD) is characterised by white matter hyperintensities (WMH) and contributes to stroke and dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 60 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 225 patients (mean age 65.4 years, 54.2% male), MCR prevalence was 16.4%. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 225 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Additionally, it is unknown whether the benefits of this cap would vary between Medicare patients with type 1 versus type 2 diabetes. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,227,229 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ten participants with AD (5 male and 5 female; mean [SD] age, 72.7 [6.3] years; 10 [100%] β-amyloid positive) were compared with 11 participants who were cognitively normal (5 male and 6 female; mean [SD] age, 72.9 [8.7] years; 11 [100%] β-amyloid negative). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →