Type 2 diabetes is associated with dementia, and also with more slight cognitive decrements. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
50/100
Of enrollees, 15.9% entered the gap, 2.6% within the first 180 days; among gap enterers, only 6.7% exited again. 5 key findings →
Participants: 287,713 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
48/100
Measures of cognition were especially important predictive features of clinical diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 534 patients who underwent AD CSF biomarkers (Roche Elecsys Aβ42, p-Tau181, total-Tau) from April 1, 2020, through April 23, 2021. 4 key findings →
Participants: 534 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 5757 participants (21.7% Black, 20.3% Latinx, 58.1% AORE), we found lower odds of amyloid positivity in Black (odds ratio [OR]: 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.83) and Latinx (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.91) compared to AORE. 4 key findings →
Participants: 5,757 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 1,073 caregivers, 33% reported high baseline strain. 5 key findings →
Participants: 100,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Women living in areas with higher walkability showed slower rates of decline in immediate (estimate=0.019, SE=0.009) and delayed recall (estimate=0.018, SE=0.008) (Figure 1). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients with DLB had significantly greater rates of hospitalization and ED visits compared to patients with AD (Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR): 1.46, 95% CI 1.24, 1.73, IRR: 1.46, 95% CI 1.29, 1.77, respectively) and controls (IRR: 1.77, 95% CI 1.46, 2.14, IRR: 2.21, 95% CI 1.82, 2.69, respectively) and ED visits compared to those with VD (IRR: 1.24, 95% CI 1.03, 1.50). 5 key findings →
Participants: 175 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Those who reached the DBT in both years had higher morbidity and utilization. 4 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The mean (SD) age of PWD was 81 (8.1) years; 45% were women, 33% Black, and 15% Hispanic. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nearly half of the incident ADRD codes were associated with a hospital‐based encounter. 5 key findings →
Participants: 13,962 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Diabetes is a major public health burden. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Higher teacher‐student ratio was associated with greater gray matter volume (β = 6.25, 95% CI: 1.57, 10.92) but was not associated hippocampal volume (β = ‐0.01, 95% CI: ‐0.14, 0.11), ventricular volume (β = ‐0.04, 95% CI: ‐0.13, 0.04), or white matter hyperintensity (β = ‐0.02, 95% CI: ‐0.31, 0.26) (Table 2). 5 key findings →
Participants: 450 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
People with dementia (PWD) are frequently exposed to polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication use, in which the risks of medication use outweigh the benefits or the medication is not aligned with treatment goals. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found notable differences in socio‐demographic and clinical characteristics, and utilization patterns in the year prior to death between decedents with dementia who were hospitalized in the last 30 days of life vs. those who were not. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,299 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Residence in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods may be associated with lower amyloid pathology in cognitively impaired individuals. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
average annual dementia incidence in White, but not Black, adults (1% versus 0%), due to hypertensive individuals' greater survival, and reduce annual ASCVD events more in Black than White adults (13% versus 5%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Being in the top 5% indicates that 95% of all other Medicare Advantage plans prescribed more Poly-ACH regimens than KPSC. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
23/100
If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes one to care for our ill as well. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We estimated associations of educational attainment and Alzheimer disease genetic risk with treatment initiation and incident dementia and compared GLP-1 receptor agonist initiators with initiators of non-sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor second-line therapies, with a separate sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor compa 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 14,364 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
KEY POINTSO_LIThis paper demonstrates the feasibility of implementing Geriatric ED programs with targeted support for people living with or at risk for dementia across three distinct health systems in San Francisco. 5 key findings →
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →