Dementia is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 33,995 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among ambulatory adults with hypertension, treating to a systolic blood pressure goal of less than 120 mm Hg compared with a goal of less than 140 mm Hg did not result in a significant reduction in the risk of probable dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 4,678 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The average life expectancy has increased substantially in the past few decades in most industrialized countries; however, not all of the increased life expectancy is being spent in optimal health, especially among individuals with low socioeconomic status. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 135 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fragmented investigation has masked the overall picture for causes of cardiovascular disease (CVD). 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The objective of our study was to assess the efficacy and safety of donepezil in young adults with Down syndrome (DS) but no evidence of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 123 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial will provide important information on the risks and benefits of intensive blood pressure treatment targets in a diverse sample of high-risk participants, including those with prior cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and those aged ≥75 years. 4 key findings →
Participants: 9,361 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The majority of participants were female and were taking concomitant psychotropic medications (antidepressants and antipsychotics) at baseline. 3 key findings →
Design: phase-2-trial Participants: 75 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Whether or not there is targeted pharmacotherapy for dementia, an active and healthy lifestyle that includes physical activity (PA) may be a better option than medication for preventing dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 484,169 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
55/100
These data suggest significant treatment benefits of donepezil in early-stage Alzheimer disease, supporting the initiation of therapy early in the disease course to improve daily cognitive functioning. 3 key findings →
Participants: 96 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study aimed to identify lipid species associated with MPH response and explore lipid pathway disruptions in responders versus non-responders. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multimorbidity-the co-occurrence of two or more chronic health conditions-affects > 86% of people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The devastating effects of Alzheimer's disease (AD) are yet to be ameliorated due to the absence of curative treatment options. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
ADI was significantly higher in this cohort ( M = 3.84, SD = 2.58) than in the surrounding county ( M = 2.79, SD = 1.88, p = .000). 5 key findings →
Participants: 204 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
275 cognitively normal controls (NC), 100 subjective memory complaint (SMC), 559 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 143 Alzheimer's disease dementia subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative received ( 18 F)-florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET) scans. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundNeuropsychological (NP) assessment is crucial for diagnosing prodromal and Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) syndromes. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,195 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Over 15 years of follow-up (UKB), moderate or high CVH versus low CVH was associated with a lower risk of MCI (hazard ratio 0.82 [95% CI 0.71, 0.95], P < 0.05) but not with risk of all-cause dementia (0.97 [0.84, 1.11], P = 0.63). 4 key findings →
Participants: 41,374 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), highlighted the virus's impact on the central nervous system and its potential to exacerbate neurodegenerative diseases, similar to that in Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Neural Network classifier achieved an accuracy of 91% with a 95% CI ranging from 0.79-0.97 and an AUC of 94%, on the test set after identifying the most significant features for AD prediction. 5 key findings →
Participants: 174 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Respondents who reported no difficulty deciding (DECIDE = 2) had substantially lower odds of SCD than those who reported difficulty (DECIDE = 1; aOR approximately 0.13; FDR < 0.05). 1 key finding →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 298,944 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →