Apathy was significantly more prevalent in dementia and MCI patients compared to HC. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 200 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Our analysis revealed that 26.40% of the participants had mild cognitive impairment, whereas 48.50% demonstrated low adherence to the MIND diet. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 462 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MCI patients showed significantly reduced plasma levels of TGF-β1 and increased TNF-α concentrations compared to other participants. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 37 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 403 participants (mean age 56.4 ± 5.7 years, 62.5% female), the median number of dementia risk factors was 5.0; hyperlipidaemia (92.5%), low cognitive activity (72.5%), obesity (57.6%), and hypertension (52.7%) were the most prevalent. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 403 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD) is associated with vascular cognitive impairment, dementia, and stroke. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 59 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy) is an established risk factor for cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 507 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In practice, knowledge and expertise are critical for effective functioning, and the available evidence suggests that older adults effectively employ specific knowledge and expertise and can gain new knowledge when it is required. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
47/100
Given the reported health benefits of a Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) and delay in cognitive decline, we aimed to determine the level of adherence to a MedDiet using an 11-point scale and examine relationships with cognitive function and psychological well-being. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings indicate that the use of antipsychotic agents and sedatives can affect the natural course of Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In interviews PWD were able to indicate their treatment preferences across all three scenarios. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Prevalence of ACPs and formal authorization of a legal representative was low among the deceased NH residents in Flanders, Belgium. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is considerable ambiguity about initiating ACP in dementia at diagnosis among physicians practicing in two different European health care systems and caring for different patient populations. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The percentage of psychological distress was similar between caregivers of cancer patients (77.6%) and caregivers of dementia patients (72.4%). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Community-based services are important for improving outcomes for individuals with dementia and their caregivers. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These results provide new evidence of exposure-related structural abnormalities in the hippocampus and amygdala in long-term heavy cannabis users and corroborate similar findings in the animal literature. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cross-sectional studies of normal aging indicate an association between memory and hippocampal volume, and between executive functioning and subcortical-frontal circuits. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Anatomical segmentation of structures of interest is critical to quantitative analysis in medical imaging. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although a link between body mass index (BMI) and brain volume has been established in several cross-sectional studies, evidence of the association between change in BMI over time and changes in brain structure is limited. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Early to mid-adolescence is an important developmental period for subcortical brain maturation, but longitudinal studies of these neurodevelopmental changes are lacking. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The risk of incident dementia is high among patients with ischemic stroke, particularly in association with intercurrent medical illnesses that might cause cerebral hypoxia or ischemia, suggesting that cerebral hypoperfusion may serve as a basis for some cases of dementia after stroke. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Plasma and CSF NFL concentrations were very highly correlated (r = 0.89, P < 0.0001). 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive deficits and depression appear to be more common in aging former NFL players compared with healthy controls. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A blood-based biomarker of Alzheimer's disease (AD) progression could be instrumental in targeting asymptomatic individuals for treatment early in the disease process. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The prevalence ratio of many common psychiatric and somatic conditions is increased in adults with epilepsy who consult a primary care physician in the U.K. These findings may have implications in the diagnosis and management of epilepsy and coexisting conditions, as well as in health care provision. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Physical performance speed was associated with executive function after adjusting for age, sex, and age-related factors in sedentary older adults with aMCI. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
- Randomised / 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
- Multi-centre 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 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.
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 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 →