27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Studies suggest that reminiscence strategies combined with an intergenerational approach may yield significant social and mental health benefits for participants. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Crotty M, Whitehead CH, Wundke R, et al . 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 320 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
He has even given a threshold outlining when the practice of medicine ends versus when the practice of unethical, non–institutional review board approved research begins. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We expect to demonstrate that personalized TMS intervention has a measurable positive impact in cognition, emotion, daily living activities and brain connectivity, thus representing a potential treatment for Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
As our population ages, the incidence and prevalence of Alzheimer disease (AD) will increase dramatically. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Data available on the relationship between salivary function and specific drug therapy are sparse. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We hypothesize that the experimental group will be more effective in managing caregiver burden and coping strategies and that this will improve the perception of well-being, anxiety, and depression among caregivers. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
COG-T CHD is the first clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of computer-based cognitive training in patients with coronary heart disease, filling an important gap in the treatment evidence for cognitive digital therapy. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A recent randomized trial demonstrated clear cerebrospinal-fluid DHA target engagement without detectable improvement in cognition or brain volume over 24 months. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Greater spend on social care (including availability of care home places) was associated with reduced spend in health care, with shorter length of hospital stay and decrease in readmissions. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Various approaches to advance care planning are in use and generally acceptable also for persons with dementia and their care partners. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Significantly increased levels of oxidized nucleic acids, proteins, and lipids have been described in the brains of subjects with Alzheimer disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) as well as young adults with Down syndrome, compared to age-matched controls. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Eli Lilly's newer anti-amyloid antibody remternetug showed fast, dose-dependent removal of amyloid plaques in a small early trial: three-quarters of people getting the higher doses had their brain amyloid drop below the threshold used to call a scan 'positive' within about six months. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 41 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ImportanceThe ASPREE randomized trial found no overall benefit of low-dose aspirin for disability-free survival among older adults. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundNon-pharmacological interventions may enhance motor-cognitive integration in prodromal Alzheimers disease (pAD). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 68 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Phase 1 (realist review; 86 papers) identified that a key intervention component was the activities enabling the development of moments of connection. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 32 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sixty participants (30 intervention, 30 control) were recruited and followed up between March 2024 to September 2025. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our study delivers ambivalent results for the efficacy of care management for caregivers. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 96 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this trial, $5 and $25 noncontingent monetary incentives included in mailed recruitment letters did not produce a detectable improvement in response among ADRD caregiving dyads. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 103 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults in senior living communities (SLCs) often face barriers to maintaining emotional well-being and family ties. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 90 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This provides the first evidence in older adults with cognitive concerns that higher step counts are associated with fewer depressive but more anxiety symptoms. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 629 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A 12-week HIIT+RT intervention was more effective than HIIT alone in increasing the thickness/volume signature in individuals with CAD, yet no differences were observed compared to UC and the interventions did not affect the GMMD signature. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 105 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In a recent open-label, single-arm study, vortioxetine, an antidepressant, was associated with improved cognitive function in patients with MCI, however, no placebo-controlled studies have been conducted to support these findings. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In SPRINT, intensive vs standard SBP control yielded a significantly larger 4-year absolute risk reduction in dementia among APOE ε4 carriers (−1.7%) than non-carriers (0.2%; P-interaction = .045); the relative-scale interactions were directionally consistent but not significant. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Randomisation: Allocated 1 : 1 : 1 through Trials Unit, independently of trial team. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 326 Evidence: high
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 →