27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Study-level data from 14 studies, 2,310,330 individuals, and 102,174 dementia case patients were included. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,310,330 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This retrospective cohort study is to investigate the association between herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections and dementia, and the effects of anti-herpetic medications on the risk involved, using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 33,448 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nineteen articles involving 142,772 participants were included. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 142,772 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After propensity score matching, each group consisted of 15901 patients. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 15,901 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The incidence of the first episode of delirium after hip surgery in the elderly was 1.87 events per 1000 PYs. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 118,682 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We observed that simvastatin is associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of dementia in subjects > or =65 years, using any of three models. 5 key findings →
Participants: 700,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data from 1,272,495 individuals, with the mean age at diagnosis ranging from 76.8 years (South Korea) to 82.9 years (Germany), show that the overall median length of survival following recorded diagnosis ranges from 2.4 years (New Zealand) to 7.9 years (South Korea). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,272,495 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although ACP programs in nursing homes may increase DNR directives, evidence of other EoL outcomes remains limited and inconsistent. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Consensus was achieved on 28 statements. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
TDP-43 is a multifunctional DNA/RNA-binding protein that has been identified as the major component of the cytoplasmic ubiquitin (+) inclusions (UBIs) in diseased cells of frontotemporal lobar dementia (FTLD-U) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The proportion of palliative utilization in cancer deaths started at 21.7% in 2010 and increased to 63.2% by 2020 with the beta coefficient of 0.09 (95% CI: 0.09-0.09). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 12,237 cases of donepezil and 6975 cases of rivastigmine were submitted to the BNHI for prior authorization; among them, 72.6% of donepezil and 66.5% of rivastigmine cases received authorization. 5 key findings →
Participants: 12,237 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among 177 403 decedents, 82.41% had cancer and 17.59% non-cancer diagnoses. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional 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 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 →