27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
There were 21 603 to 51 236 patients per year (total for 2010-2020, 381 488 patients) in the OAC-eligible incident AF cohort (mean [SD] age, 77.2 [6.1] to 77.4 [6.8] years; 13 871 [51.8%] to 22 901 [49.8%] women). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 236 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The findings of this cohort study suggest that among older Medicare patients undergoing surgical treatment, a diagnosis of a PND was associated with an increase in health care costs for up to 1 year following the surgical procedure. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 473 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study found that the prevalence of maternal psychological distress in healthy, well-educated, and employed pregnant women was high, underappreciated, and associated with impaired fetal brain biochemistry and hippocampal growth as well as accelerated cortical folding. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 193 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings suggest that benzoate treatment may improve cognitive function in women with later-phase dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 97 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this study, lower AD signature region volumes, brain microhemorrhages, higher WMH volumes, and infarcts were risk factors associated with dementia in older community-based residents. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,553 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This cohort study found that COVID-19 mortality decreased over time during 2020 and that patient demographic characteristics and comorbidities were associated with higher clinical severity. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 174 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Innovations associated with the bayesian approach can improve the efficiency of drug development and the accuracy of clinical trials, even in the context of substantial data missingness. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 854 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Thirty-five studies were analyzed with data from 3268 caregivers (pooled mean age [SD of sample means], 63.48 [5.99] years; 76.7% female) were analyzed. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia risk may be attenuated by physical activity (PA); however, the specific activity levels optimal for dementia prevention are unclear. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,604 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Individual conditions have been identified as risk factors for dementia; however, it is important to consider the role of multimorbidity, as conditions often co-occur. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 960 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study consisted of 20 400 patients (9264 female [45.4%]; 1576 Black [7.7%], 3944 Latinx [19.3%], and 10 480 White [51.4%]), including 5100 patients with mTBI (median [IQR] age, 36.0 [25.0-51.0] years), 5100 patients with msTBI (median [IQR age, 35.0 [25.0-52.0] years), and 10 200 matched patients in the control group (median [IQR] age, 36.0 [25.0-51.0] years). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 400 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 11 601 participants (mean [SD] age, 59.18 [9.41] years; 5569 male [48.0%]), 9145 (78.8%) were exposed to at least 1 ACE indicator, 4241 (36.6%) to at least 1 AAE indicator, and 3531 (30.4%) to both ACE and AAE markers. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 601 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data from 362 study participants were analyzed (mean [SD] age, 65.6 [7.9] years), of whom 152 (42.0%) were African American, 230 (63.5%) were women, and 189 (52.2%) had MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Racial/ethnic groups differed in sources of recruitment, reasons for screen failure, and overall probability of eligibility in a preclinical AD trial. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,945 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →