27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Dementia is marked by progressive cognitive decline linked to oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and synaptic dysfunction. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 29 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The AD set included 23,092 cases and 30,920 controls, the ALS set included 7391 cases and 12,442 controls, and the PD set included 8498 patients and 9161 controls. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 23,092 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Amyloid beta (Aβ) peptides are the major components of senile plaques, one of the main pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study provides a comprehensive review of the last 10 years of research on neuroinflammation and AD, including the number and impact of research findings, research hotspots, and future trends. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,833 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A diverse and stable microbiota promotes a healthy state, nevertheless, an imbalance in gut or oral bacterial composition, called dysbiosis, can cause gastrointestinal disorders, systemic inflammatory states and oxidative stress, among others. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research evidence indicating common metabolic mechanisms through which type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) increases risk of late-onset Alzheimer's dementia (LOAD) has accumulated over recent decades. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Future studies should prioritize short-term interventions and develop integrated approaches combining individual and group formats. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 750 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Numerous tools for assessment of cognitive impairment in low-literacy settings have been developed, and tools developed for use in high-income countries have also been validated in low-literacy settings. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy of Pet robot intervention (PRI) for people with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
There are variations in the interventions, such as location and dosage. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There is a growing interest in using technology to provide meaningful activities for people living with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our review identified several measures of speech which may assist with diagnosis and classification, and consolidated the brain-behavior associations relating to speech in FTD, PPA, and progressive apraxia of speech. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Advancing age is the focus of recent studies on familial and sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD), suggesting a prolonged pre-clinical phase several decades before the onset of dementia symptoms. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Evidence is insufficient to support the use of pharmaceutical agents or dietary supplements to prevent cognitive decline or Alzheimer’s disease. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Over 44 million people suffer from dementia around the world. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although mutations within the TREM2 gene have been robustly associated with Alzheimer's disease, it is not known whether alterations in the regulation of this gene are also involved in pathogenesis. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with abnormal tau and amyloid-β accumulation in the brain, leading to neurofibrillary tangles, neuropil threads and extracellular amyloid-β plaques. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The concept of cognitive reserve is proposed to explain the mismatch between the degree of pathological changes and their clinical manifestations and has been used to help understand the variation in the rate of cognitive decline and the development of dementias. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Cross-ancestry sex-stratified analyses identified several loci with evidence of interaction (p 0.05). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 25,284 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
DSD is linked to adverse outcomes, compared to dementia alone, like longer hospitalisation [3], mortality [3, 4], functional decline [3] and need for residential care [3]. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 64 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The introduction of incretin mimetics (IMs), including glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) such as liraglutide and semaglutide, as well as dual GLP-1/glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor co-agonists (GLP-1/GIP RAs) like tirzepatide, has revolutionized obesity treatment. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Ninety-one reviews provided evidence on the impact of telemedicine in dementia care. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia poses a significant global health challenge for both clinicians and patients, impacting millions of individuals worldwide, yet its early diagnosis remains underexplored. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 415 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Meta-analysis identified 44 CpGs and 44 differentially methylated regions consistently associated with time to dementia in both cohorts. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In a meta-analysis of 2 one-sample MR studies, the odds ratio (OR) for 1-SD higher BMI in predicting vascular-related dementia was 1.63 (95% CI, 1.13-2.35). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →