27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled studies at lower risk of bias comparing ChEI treatment with placebo or usual treatment, for 6 months or longer, in patients with dementia of any type. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 79,153 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frequent consumption of fruits and vegetables, fish, and omega-3 rich oils may decrease the risk of dementia and Alzheimer disease, especially among ApoE epsilon 4 noncarriers. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,085 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Peripheral inflammatory markers are elevated in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,217 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, 2,277 individuals had at least 1 baseline blood biomarker available (n = 357 for CSF subsample, n = 649 for PET subsample), among whom 257 were diagnosed with clinical AD/mixed dementia during follow-up. 2 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 357 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, we showed that SDB was associated with MTL atrophy in cognitively asymptomatic older adults engaged in the Alzheimer continuum, which may increase the risk of developing memory impairment over time. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 122 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MoCA was administered to 274 patients from 2 prospective hospital-based cohort studies in Germany (n = 125) and France (n = 149). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 125 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 135 older adults (mean age = 69.3 years; women = 61.5%), no associations were found within AD-signature regions (all p > 0.25). 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Under circumstances emulating routine clinical practice, the positive predictive value of an MCI diagnosis is in line with previous clinical studies and the external validity of the concept is strengthened. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 446,439 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
All synaptic biomarkers tested had a good discriminatory power to distinguish patients with AD abnormal CSF from those with non-AD disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 81 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The GuidAge study is the largest study carried out in Europe on the prevention of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 2,854 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study is based on a population-based cohort of 7,839 subjects over 65 years with 7 years of follow-up. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 7,839 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
MCI criteria perform poorly when applied to a representative population sample. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Contrary to early case-control studies that suggested smoking protects against Alzheimer disease (AD), recent prospective studies have shown that elderly who smoke may be at increased risk for dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 17,610 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study highlights challenges for the reproducibility of α-syn SAA results across different protocols applied by different laboratories. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 30 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
More research is needed to elucidate the neural mechanisms underlying these regional associations, which may involve motor and sensorimotor circuits hitherto largely neglected in the pathophysiology of AD. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with men, women have an increased risk for AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Conventionally defined MCI has reasonable predictive value and specificity for AD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,265 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Of 2,323 MEMENTO participants, 2,136 (92%) were included in this study. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 307 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Inclusion of instrumental activities of daily living restriction in the criteria of mild cognitive impairment improves the prediction of dementia and the stability of this status over time. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,517 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This observational study provides further evidence that lipid-lowering agents are associated with decreased risk of dementia, whereas hyperlipidemia is associated with increased odds for non-Alzheimer-disease-type dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 9,294 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The CAIDE dementia and Framingham risk scores predict cognitive decline in late middle age but the Framingham risk scores may have an advantage over the dementia risk score for use in primary prevention for assessing risk of cognitive decline and targeting of modifiable risk factors. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The aim of this observational study was to evaluate whether the treatment of VRF is associated with a slower cognitive decline in patients who have AD without cerebrovascular disease (CVD). 4 key findings →
Participants: 72 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Contrary to previous reports, head trauma was not a risk factor for AD, and smoking did not protect against AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The designed battery consists of six subtests exploring the following: conceptualization, mental flexibility, motor programming, sensitivity to interference, inhibitory control, and environmental autonomy. 1 key finding →
Participants: 24 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Higher baseline p-tau181 and NfL were associated with significantly faster decline in most cognitive, physical, and functional outcomes (+1 SD p-tau181: β MMSE = -0.055, 95% CI -0.067 to -0.043, β FCSRT = -0.034, 95% CI -0.043 to -0.025, β fluency = -0.029, 95% CI -0.038 to -0.020, β SPPB = -0.040, 95% CI -0.057 to -0.022, and β 4IADL = -0.115, 95% CI 0.091-0.140. +1 SD NfL: β MMSE = -0.039, 95% CI -0.053 to -0.025, β FCSRT = -0.022, 95% CI -0.032 to -0.012, β fluency = -0.014, 95% CI -0.024 to -0.004, and β 4IADL = 0.077, 95% CI 0.048-0.105). 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,938 Evidence: moderate
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 27,380 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 →