Hippocampal neurogenesis (HN) occurs throughout the life course and is important for memory and mood. 2 key findings →
Participants: 371 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
analysis of returning home at discharge included 87,797 patients; 57,104 (65%) were discharged home. 5 key findings →
Participants: 87,797 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Across several cohorts, delirium is emerging as an important prognostic signal, independent of chronic markers of baseline morbidity, that identifies patients at markedly increased risk of death or future dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,556 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
long baseline nighttime and 24-h sleep durations (≥9 h) as well as being persistent or becoming long sleepers during follow-up were associated with dementia incidence. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Given considerable variation in diagnostic and therapeutic practice, there is a need for national guidance on the use of neuroimaging, fluid biomarkers, cognitive testing, follow-up and diagnostic terminology in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
In-hospital death among nursing home residents with dementia has been associated with poorer quality of end-of-life care. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 240,000 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The MAINTAIN intervention demonstrated high fidelity in home assessments and intervention delivery, with participants receiving a mean of 15 of the 22 available sessions with a range of 5-25 sessions. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of the patients, 82.2% were receiving at least one dizziness-associated medication and 71.2% at least one hypotension-associated medication. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 210 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Design diagnostic accuracy study. 1 key finding →
Participants: 419 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A positive 4AT (≥1) on admission demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.87 and specificity of 0.71 when compared to a clinical diagnosis of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 221 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frailty status (prefrail/frail n = 520, robust n = 625) at baseline did not modify the effect of intervention on global cognition during the 2-year follow-up (P-value for frailty × intervention × time interaction > .05). 5 key findings →
Participants: 520 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study included 3540 participants with RVC data and 489 with WMH data (median [IQR] age: 73.2 [71.4-76.3] and 72.5 [71.2-75.4] years; female: 52.9% and 47.6%) over a median follow-up of 7.4 [IQR 5.5-8.5] and 3.8 [IQR 2.9-5.3] years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,540 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Out of 462,327 eligible participants, those with constipation were associated with higher incidence of three outcome diseases (1415/20,263 [7.0%]) than those without (18,848/442,064 [4.3%]), with adjusted hazard ratio (HR) being 1.35 [1.27-1.42]. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
of 74,486 decedents (60.5% women; mean age 87.1 years (standard deviation: 7.1)), 82.6% had at least one ED visit in their last year of life. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
50/100
The impact of cognitive impairment on activities of daily living (ADL) is being used as a major criterion for differentiating between mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Four thousand four hundred eighty-six participants were included (mean age 71.3 ± 4.7 years, 30% participants Aβ+, 59% female). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Mean age was 83.5 years (delirium 78.7 vs non-delirium 88.4); 13/20 were female; 17/20 had premorbid cognitive decline/impairment or dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 547 310 older adults undergoing surgery, 43 041 (7·9%) had preoperative dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Total cost of care in early stage AD (CDR-SB ≤ 4) was 16,448€ (95% CI 13,722-19,716) annually. 5 key findings →
Participants: 231 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
25 (21.6%) of the 116 patients living at home were admitted to residential or nursing home care during the follow-up year. 3 key findings →
Participants: 124 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Design the FINnish ORAL Health Study in Long-Term Care study is a cross-sectional clinical research comprising findings on oral and general health and nutrition. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The AB Cognitive Screen (ABCS) 135, sensitive in differentiating MCI from dementia, was modified to improve sensitivity and specificity, producing the quick mild cognitive impairment (Qmci) screen. 4 key findings →
Participants: 630 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Design identification of relevant items, pre-testing of items and refinement of administrative procedures and scoring in four successive groups of 30 subjects each, pilot testing in a group of 100 subjects comparable to those for whom the measure is intended, administration to a representative sample of 387 people aged 55 and older, and assessment of the reliability of the final measure. 2 key findings →
Participants: 30 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Carriers of the e4 allele may be more vulnerable to conditions that are independent risk factors for cognitive decline, such as cardiometabolic diseases. 4 key findings →
Participants: 111,739 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Previous studies have indicated a prevalence of dementia in older admissions of ∼42% in a single London teaching hospital, and 21% in four Queensland hospitals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Where “Free full text” comes from
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
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
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.
- Journal tier up to 10 pts
- Journal's citation record up to 4 pts
- Study design up to 12 pts
- Strength of evidence up to 5 pts
- Peer-review validation up to 10 pts
- How recent up to 5 pts
- Sample size up to 4 pts
- Effect reported up to 3 pts
- Studied in people up to 3 pts
- Randomised / blinded up to 2 pts
- Times cited up to 7 pts
- Citations per year up to 5 pts
- Impact for its field and year up to 6 pts
- Cited by studies here up to 6 pts
- Still being cited up to 4 pts
- Senior author's track record up to 4 pts
- Institution's track record up to 3 pts
- Multi-centre collaboration up to 3 pts
- Indexed in PubMed up to 2 pts
- Free to read up to 2 pts
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 28,180 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.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →