28,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In analyses that addressed bias due to reverse causation, physical inactivity was not associated with all-cause dementia or Alzheimer's disease, although an indication of excess dementia risk was observed in a subgroup of physically inactive individuals who developed cardiometabolic disease. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 404 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 10 095 participants (67.3% men; aged 35-55 years in 1985-1988), a total of 1710 cases of diabetes and 639 cases of dementia were recorded over a median follow-up of 31.7 years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 95 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
During 1 110 831 person-years at risk, we recorded 245 573 hospitalisations in the Finnish cohorts; the corresponding numbers in the UK study were 60 946 hospitalisations in 186 572 person-years. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 9,838 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Midlife and late-life risk factors contributed to 22.7% and 16.5% of total dementia cases, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 37,931 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Adherence to the Life Simple 7 ideal cardiovascular health recommendations in midlife was associated with a lower risk of dementia later in life. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 7,899 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
More frequent social contact at age 60 years was associated with lower dementia risk (hazard ratio [HR] for each SD higher social contact frequency = 0.88 [95% CI 0.79, 0.98], p = 0.02); effect size of the association of social contact at 50 or 70 years with dementia was similar (0.92 [95% CI 0.83, 1.02], p = 0.13 and 0.91 [95% CI 0.78, 1.06], p = 0.23, respectively) but not statistically significant. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 10,228 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sleep dysregulation is a feature of dementia but it remains unclear whether sleep duration prior to old age is associated with dementia incidence. 4 key findings →
Participants: 7,959 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Multimorbidity (hazard ratio [HR] 4·12 [95% CI 3·41-4·98]), frailty (HR 2·38 [95% CI 1·93-2·93]), and disability (HR 1·73 [95% CI 1·34-2·22]) were associated with increased risk of mortality; these associations were not modified by socioeconomic status. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 308 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The clinical value of current multifactorial algorithms for individualized assessment of dementia risk remains unclear. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 4,865 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 704 records met the inclusion criteria for bibliometric analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 704 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest that decreasing disparities between sexes in education, due to secular increases in educational opportunities, could attenuate sex differences in dementia risk and cognitive decline in the future. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 924 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The ε4 allele of apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene and increasing age are two of the most important known risk factors for developing Alzheimer disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,593 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Female participants had a lower hazard of early-onset dementia compared with males (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·61-0·80]). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 544,442 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A distinct set of midlife depressive symptoms was associated with an increased risk of dementia, suggesting that these symptoms might be early markers of underlying neurodegenerative processes. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 5,811 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Type 2 diabetes is associated with increased risks of cognitive dysfunction and brain abnormalities. 4 key findings →
Participants: 10,663 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The proposed novel, pragmatic method to determine CSF biomarker cutoffs for AD does not require assessment of other biomarkers or assumptions concerning the clinical diagnosis of patients. 1 key finding →
Participants: 497 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
14 IPD-Work studies were assessed and six studies were excluded due to missing outcome data and unavailable data for pooling, resulting in the inclusion of eight studies with 124 909 participants. 5 key findings →
Participants: 909 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We included 394,255 individuals including 184 incident cases of CD and 459 of UC after median follow-up of 13.6 years (4,889,910 person-years). 5 key findings →
Participants: 394,255 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Current dementia risk scores have had limited success in consistently identifying at-risk individuals across different ages and geographical locations. 4 key findings →
Participants: 176 Evidence: moderate
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
The increasing number of people with dementia globally illustrates the urgent need to reduce dementia's scale and impact. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The final study sample comprised 8,797 participants (53.5% women, mean age at HUNT4 77.8 [SD 6.2]). 5 key findings →
Participants: 8,797 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy) is an established risk factor for cognitive impairment. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 507 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A descriptive study using a transversal national online survey to evaluate the prevalence and characteristics of behavioral and psychological symptoms (BPSD) of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and specifically, the perpetration of violent acts against primary caregivers. 196 responses, obtained in one month, were analyzed. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 28,580 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 28,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.8%), 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 (3.6% 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 →