27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This systematic review and meta-analyses covering a wide range of observational studies and diverse settings provides robust support for the CR hypothesis. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 437,477 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 19 reviews containing 37 meta-analyses were included umbrella review. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 19 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Population-based estimates for the epidemiology of FTD varied widely in the included studies. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics and in outcome variables (HHI, GSES, and SF-12v2 mental component score and physical component score) between users and nonusers. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 101 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Here, we present new criteria aimed to optimize early, sensitive, and specific clinical diagnosis of PSP on the basis of currently available evidence. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data collection began in Ontario and Alberta Canada in June 2015 and is expected to be completed in June 2017. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent evidence suggests that Web-based interventions have the potential to support caregivers by decreasing caregiver stress and burden. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Across all domains, 14 constructs influenced development and implementation. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Adult-onset leukoencephalopathy with axonal spheroids and pigmented glia (ALSP) is a progressive degenerative white matter disorder. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Data collection will begin in four Canadian provinces (Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and Saskatchewan) in February 2020 and is expected to be completed in June 2021. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite the growing body of evidence over the 20 years of this review, and the widespread interest in family dementia caregiving generally, much of the research exploring family caregiving in rural areas focuses on the experience, use and barriers to formal service provision. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Living with dementia requires decision making about numerous topics including daily activities and advance care planning (ACP). 1 key finding →
Design: umbrella review Participants: 21 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study findings demonstrate high user satisfaction with telehealth in a rural memory clinic and the sound psychometric properties of the TeSS in this population. 2 key findings →
Participants: 223 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Clinical diagnosis of Parkinson's syndrome (PS) is reasonably easy in most cases but the distinction between different variants of PS may be difficult in early cases. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The availability, accessibility and acceptability of services are critical factors in rural health service delivery. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Planning for the care of increasing numbers of elderly persons with dementia has become an urgent health services concern in Canada and elsewhere, yet little is known about the challenges of providing appropriate dementia care in rural areas. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Delivery of cognitive rehabilitation by telehealth appeared feasible but required modifications such as greater reliance on caregivers and clients for manipulating materials. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There was a trend toward increased risk of being assaulted in the last year associated with being in a non-SCU facility. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Key barriers included limited digital literacy, resistance to technology and privacy concerns, as well as competing organisational priorities, and inadequate technological infrastructure. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 →