First, sleep problems are associated with accidents and human errors. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
As outlined in the original cohort profile,1 The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) is a prospective cohort study designed to provide an evidence base for addressing the challenges and opportunities associated with population ageing in Ireland. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,525 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
LASI is India’s first ageing study and the world’s largest in terms of sample size, and will provide comprehensive longitudinal data for designing policies and programmes targeted toward the overall well-being of the older population. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 250 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results suggest that having an increased body weight or abdominal obesity are associated with increased dementia incidence. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 453 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
As shown in Table 2, attrition in LASA is associated with predictors and outcomes of interest to our research. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,805 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
By wave, compared with those who remained in the LBC1921 study at Waves 1 to 5, participants who dropped out had: significantly lower older-age IQ scores at Wave 1 Wave 2 = and Wave 3 = lower scores at Waves and at Waves 1 = and 2 = By wave, compared with those who remained in the LBC1936 study at Waves 1 to participants who dropped out had: significantly lower older-age IQ scores at Wave 1 Wave 2 = and Wave 3 = lower scores at Wave 1 = Wave 2 and Wave 3 = lower at Wave 1 = Wave 2 = and Wave 3 and lower physical as at Wave 1 Wave 2 = and Wave 3 = and at Wave 1 = at each wave in the Lothian Birth Cohort 1921 are mean and standard for and for each wave sample = Wave 1 = Waves 1 and 2 = Waves 2 and 3 = Waves IQ from Moray House Test for age in at time of testing and to IQ is the was from to from the in 1 and at Wave 1. as of from the Wave 2 two participants who not Wave 1. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 87 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is evidence of geographical variation in rates of dementia in affluent countries at a variety of geographical scales. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Therefore, respective software was developed in-house.8,9 Segmentation results are then analysed for potential associations with disease risks and to establish reference intervals of organ size and function.10 SHIP is also used as a basis for meta-research with a particular focus on incidental MRI findings and their effects on study participants.11,12 With its large amount of standardized data and the option to internally replicate findings from SHIP-START using data of the independent SHIP-TREND, the project offers good opportunities to apply new bioinformatical tools to mine the data and gain new insights into risk factors and pathomechanisms. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The study has been harmonized with leading international research so as to ensure adoption of best practice and comparability of results. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 25 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
59/100
Some well-known risk factors for AD were confirmed in this study and potential new risk factors were identified. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 36 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
59/100
Linear MR suggested that each additional hour/day of sleep was associated with 1% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0-2%; P = 0.008] slower reaction time and 3% more errors in visual-memory test (95% CI = 0-6%; P = 0.05). 4 key findings →
Participants: 395 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 2018, Carlos et al. [2] reviewed 21 studies from the SUN project that focused on the association between the MDP and several incident chronic diseases, concluding that high Mediterranean diet adherence was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, weight gain, metabolic syndrome, depression, cognitive decline, and nephrolithiasis, and with a lower heart rate and mitigation of the effects of obesity on cardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes, and our results suggested that the Mediterranean diet may improve fertility. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 79 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
For self-care and mobility activities, respondents are asked whether in the past month they used specific assistive devices (e.g. grab bar, walker) while doing a particular activity, whether they had difficulty doing the activity by themselves when using named devices, frequencies compared with a year ago and whether they received help. 5 key findings →
Participants: 8,038 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Geographical variation in dementia prevalence is confirmed in this update, whereas evidence on increasing trends is still insufficient. 1 key finding →
Participants: 76 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A re-analysis of the data from 11 case-control studies was performed to investigate the association between head trauma and Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Overall, 92.7% of the original cohort members participated in at least one follow-up round and 87.2% participated in at least two (balanced by deworming treatment status). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 7,527 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of dementia for a 5-μg/m3 increase in NO2 was 1.09 (95% CI, 1.05-1.14); the adjusted HR of dementia for a 1-μg/m3 increase in PM2.5 was 1.10 (1.04-1.17). 5 key findings →
Participants: 447 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher SEP during childhood and greater educational attainment are both associated with cognitive function in adulthood, with mothers and fathers each contributing to their offspring's formative cognitive development and later life cognitive ability (albeit in different ways). 4 key findings →
Participants: 496 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive function appears to be a marker of capacity for survival in the UK. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia incidence was 0.89 per 1000 person-years. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 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.
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 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 →