The burden of AD dementia is substantial. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,000 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
High-level evidence related to pharmacological strategies for managing Lewy body dementia is rare. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Family carers' perceptions of BPSD as challenging are associated with a sense of a declining relationship, transgressions against social norms and underlying beliefs that people with dementia inevitably lose their 'personhood'. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This review highlights that air pollutions, especially PM 2.5 and NO 2 play important role in the risk for age-related cognitive impairment and dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Evidence to date suggest there are ethnic differences in risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 12 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is some evidence that multifaceted interventions in hospital reduce the number of falls and that use of hip protectors in care homes prevents hip fractures. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
Although behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is classically defined by behavioral and socio-emotional changes, impairments often extend to other cognitive functions. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 181 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This paper provides a concise but comprehensive review of research on religion/spirituality (R/S) and both mental health and physical health. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence suggests that a high concentration of C-reactive protein (CRP) is a cardiovascular risk factor and an important correlate of cognitive disorders and depression. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Several studies report an association between REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (RBD) and neurodegenerative diseases, in particular synucleinopathies. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Although bright light therapy seems a promising treatment for sleep problems, research shows inconclusive results. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,154 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Comprehensive and unbiased meta-analysis of all published and unpublished data from case-control studies for the SORL1 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that had been repeatedly assessed across studies. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 12,464 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recently, several large randomised controlled trials about the treatments of cognitive impairment or dementia due to Parkinson's disease (CIND-PD or PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) were completed. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Huperzine A is a Chinese herb extract used for Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,823 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 87 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Circulating homocysteine levels (tHcy), a product of the folate one carbon metabolism pathway (FOCM) through the demethylation of methionine, are heritable and are associated with an increased risk of common diseases such as stroke, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,710 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
66/100
A greater sense of meaning and purpose in life is associated with lower dementia risk. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 153,445 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium is an acute change in cognition, common in hospitalized older adults, and associated with high healthcare and human cost; however, delirium's genetic and proteomic background remains poorly understood. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,059,130 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Tau is common in LBD and may reduce clinical diagnostic accuracy in people with DLB. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,511 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
CCT is efficacious on global cognition, select cognitive domains, and psychosocial functioning in people with mild cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive training is a popular intervention aimed at attenuating age-related cognitive decline, however, the effects of this intervention on brain structure and function have not been thoroughly explored. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Intervention participants with MCI self-reported, or demonstrated, improved functioning across a range of cognitive (global cognitive function, executive function, processing speed, memory, attention, mood, emotion, motivation, brain cortex, orientation), and physical (gait, balance, mobility) outcomes. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The growing prevalence of neurodegenerative disorders associated with aging and cognitive decline has generated increasing cross-disciplinary interest in non-pharmacological interventions, such as computerized cognitive training (CCT), which may prevent or slow cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Observational epidemiological studies provide valuable information regarding naturally occurring protective factors observed in populations with very low prevalences of vascular disease. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The review's analysis confirmed that adherence to the MedDiet is associated with some improvement in cognitive health. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
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 27,780 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.
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 27,780 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 →