27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Profiles of high risk for future dementia are well understood and are likely to concern mostly those in low-income and middle-income countries and people at greater disadvantage in high-income countries. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,400 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ACHIEVE-P sets the stage for the full-scale ACHIEVE trial (N = 850, recruitment beginning November 2017), the first randomized trial to determine efficacy of a best practices hearing (vs. successful aging) intervention on reducing cognitive decline in older adults with HL. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 850 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this study of adults with subjective memory impairment, a 6-month program of physical activity provided a modest improvement in cognition over an 18-month follow-up period. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 170 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Multidomain lifestyle changes are beneficial for cognitive functioning, but future interventions should be intensive enough, and supporting adherence is essential. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,260 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The effects were not statistically significant on other outcomes. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 847 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Ninety-five participant dyads (PPA mean baseline age: 67.1; 48% female) from four countries were enrolled and randomized. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Clusters with diffuse or frontal-predominant cortical thinning, but with more favourable vascular profiles, characterized by lower blood pressure and reduced obesity, showed significantly less cortical thinning (mean thickness, AD-signature, and resilience-signature regions; all p < 0.05) following the intervention. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 120 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Screening commenced in July 2022. Currently, 1,965 participants have been randomized into lifestyle intervention (n = 772) and control groups (n = 1,193). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 772 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this randomized trial of dementia care programs, no significant differences existed between health system-based and community-based care interventions nor between either active intervention or usual care regarding patient behavioral symptoms and caregiver strain. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 2,176 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A nurse-led, multidomain intervention did not result in a reduced incidence of all-cause dementia in an unselected population of older people. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 3,526 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Backgrounds To investigate the efficacy of a community group-based intervention among community-dwelling older adults with physio-cognitive decline syndrome (PCDS). 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 733 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This project will be part of the World-Wide FINGERS (Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability) Network, of which common identifiable data will be shared and harmonized among the consortia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 165 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There was no significant difference in days spent at home between the specialist unit and standard care groups (median 51 v 45 days, 95% confidence interval for difference -12 to 24; P=0.3). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 600 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older people who view a video depiction of a patient with advanced dementia after hearing a verbal description of the condition are more likely to opt for comfort as their goal of care compared with those who solely listen to a verbal description. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 106 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our educational intervention increased ACP initiation, and the number of nonmedical and medical preferences discussed. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 140 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Emergency department (ED)-initiated palliative care has been shown to improve patient-centred outcomes in older adults with serious, life-limiting illnesses. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,350 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
451 (11%) of 4241 beds in ten hospitals were included in the analyses. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 118 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We report the case of a 79-year-old woman with Alzheimer's disease who participated in a Phase III randomized controlled trial called CLARITY-AD testing the experimental drug lecanemab. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A systematic approach to the management of pain significantly reduced agitation in residents of nursing homes with moderate to severe dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 175 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This double-blind randomized trial does not support the hypothesis that the use of soy protein supplement containing isoflavones improves cognitive function, bone mineral density, or plasma lipids in healthy postmenopausal women when started at the age of 60 years or later. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 175 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
EQ-5D utility scores averaged 0·03 (95% CI 0·01-0·05; p=0·0002) better with levodopa than with levodopa-sparing therapy; rates of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·61-1·08, p=0·14), admissions to institutions (0·86, 0·63-1·18; p=0·4), and death (0·85, 0·69-1·06, p=0·17) were not significantly different, but the upper CIs precluded any substantial increase with levodopa compared with levodopa-sparing therapy. 179 (28%) of 632 patients allocated dopamine agonists and 104 (23%) of 460 patients allocated MAOBI discontinued allocated treatment because of side-effects compared with 11 (2%) of 528 patients allocated levodopa (p<0·0001). 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,620 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings indicate that high-speed resistance exercise training approaches are effective in improving cognitive function and physical performance in older adults with cognitive frailty. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Seventy-four participants completed the study. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 84 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Levels of apathy decreased slightly in both groups (mean decrease in AES-I of .61 points, 95% CI -3.54, 2.33 for TBI and .36 points, 95% CI -3.27, 2.55 for CAS). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 162 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 →