27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Antihypertensive use was associated with decreased AD but not non-AD risk throughout late life. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 31,250 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With no effective treatments for cognitive decline or dementia, improving the evidence base for modifiable risk factors is a research priority. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 48,522 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We also determined the extent to which sex, educational attainment, and apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (APOE*4) carrier status were associated with decline. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 42,170 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
It has been reported that social engagement may be associated with dementia risk. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 31 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases dementia risk with no pharmacologic treatment available. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Glymphatic failure may precede amyloid pathology, and predicts amyloid deposition, neurodegeneration, and clinical progression in AD. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 419 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which cognitive training via interactive computerised technology was compared with an active or inactive control intervention. 5 key findings →
Participants: 660 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Periventricular white matter hyperintensities (WMH; PVWMH) and deep WMH (DWMH) are regional classifications of WMH and reflect proposed differences in cause. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 26,654 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
White matter hyperintensities (WMH) are the most common brain-imaging feature of cerebral small vessel disease (SVD), hypertension being the main known risk factor. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APPLE-Tree is an accessible intervention associated with small improvements in cognition, although these results were not statistically significant. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data collected from clinical trials and cohort studies, such as dementia studies, are often high-dimensional, censored, heterogeneous and contain missing information, presenting challenges to traditional statistical analysis. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,037 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
High levels of caregiver burden are present in a large proportion of caregivers of people with dementia and this increases over time for those without services. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 720 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Characterization of the genetic landscape of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADD) provides a unique opportunity for a better understanding of the associated pathophysiological processes. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
MYB will be the largest internet-based trial to attempt to prevent cognitive decline and potentially dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 66 reverters to normal cognition and 157 non-reverters (stable MCI). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 223 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
SCD can precede both AD and non-AD dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 2,978 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Disturbing dreams were reported by 24.2% overall and all-cause dementia, and AD incidence was 10.8 and 5.3 per 1000 person-years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 10,238 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
APPLE-Tree has a high probability of being cost-effective for a 1-point NTB gain, a difference previously associated with a three-fold reduction in 5-year dementia risk. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Reducing the risk of dementia can halt the worldwide increase of affected people. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings suggest a higher prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease dementia in older individuals and a lower prevalence of preclinical Alzheimer’s disease in younger groups than previously estimated 2 . 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Three survey rounds included 49 to 54 participants that agreed on VasCog-2 diagnostic criteria for preclinical, mild, and major dementia levels of vascular cognitive impairment (under the overarching term VCID). 5 key findings →
Participants: 49 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While the role of diet and nutrition in cognitive health and prevention of dementia in older adults has attracted much attention, the efficacy of different dietary patterns remains uncertain. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
There is increasing evidence that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in individuals with unimpaired performance on cognitive tests may represent the first symptomatic manifestation of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between October 2021 and June 2022, 53 candidates were assessed; 29 met eligibility criteria and were randomised. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 29 Evidence: preliminary
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 →