27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The CAIDE (Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging and Dementia) Risk Score is a validated tool estimating dementia risk. 4 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 112 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Probiotics have been proposed to ameliorate cognitive impairment and depressive disorder via the gut-brain axis in patients and experimental animal models. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Faster alleviation of delirium and improved cognition justify good, comprehensive geriatric care for these patients although treatment produced no significant improvements in hard endpoints of prognosis. 4 key findings →
Participants: 87 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings suggest that older adults at higher dementia risk due to diabetes can show improvements in both cognition and disease self-management following home-based multidomain computerized cognitive training. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recruitment ended in December 2014 with 16,703 Australian and 2,411 U.S. participants, a median age of 74 (range 65-98) years and 56% women. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Both HL and depression are independent risk factors for eventual conversion to dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 8,529 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The strength of evidence for an association between gait speed and cognition was demonstrated by the number and consistency of results, as well as quality of the studies. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 29,520 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 1,164 participants (mean age 73.5 years, 64% women), 580 (49.8%) had mild hearing impairment and 196 (16.8%) had moderate/severe hearing impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,164 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Low physical activity is associated with a higher risk for dementia in older individuals, suggesting that a reduced risk of dementia and higher brain volumes may be additional health benefits of maintaining physical activity into old age. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,714 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among frail older persons, cognitive training conferred the greatest cognitive benefits. 3 key findings →
Participants: 49 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The current literature includes several studies investigating the association between physical activity and risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Over 68,904 person-years of follow-up, 1,349 participants developed dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,349 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
By pooling two long-running community studies from the same region of Pennsylvania, researchers compared dementia rates across people born in different decades, from the 1900s to the 1940s. Each successively younger birth cohort had a substantially lower risk of developing dementia at a given age, with the youngest group's risk about a quarter of the oldest group's. This adds US evidence, independent of Framingham, that generational health improvements are lowering dementia risk. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 3,010 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In particular, systemic inflammation, vascular inflammation, and altered endothelial function may play roles in domain-specific cognitive decline of nondemented individuals. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,159 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Social activity is associated with a decreased risk of incident disability in activities of daily living, mobility, and instrumental activities of daily living, among community-dwelling older adults. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 954 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium is associated with cognitive decline and subsequent dementia, and rises in plasma total tau (tTau) and neurofilament light (NfL), providing links to Amyloid-Tau-Neurodegeneration (ATN) pathophysiology. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 54 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In cross-sectional analyses at baseline, there was no association between DNAm age acceleration and cognitive function scores. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 266 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Digital literacy may help reduce cognitive decline among persons aged between 50 and 89 years. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 6,442 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium is a distressing neurocognitive disorder recently linked to sleep disturbances. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 818 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
All three psychomotor disturbance subtypes had an elevated risk of dying during the 1-year follow-up relative to the normal psychomotor group, though the hypoactive group had the highest mortality risk and was the only group with a statistically significantly elevated risk relative to the normal group. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Even in persons who are currently nondisabled, a simple measure of lower extremity performance is predictive of subsequent hospitalization, especially for geriatric conditions. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,381 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Exercise at midlife may reduce the odds of dementia in older adulthood, suggesting that exercise interventions should be explored as a potential strategy for delaying disease onset. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 264 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
There are specific high-risk preexisting comorbidities for COVID-19 hospitalization and related deaths in community-based older men and women. 3 key findings →
Participants: 19 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The mean age was 58.4 years (SD = 6.2). A 20-dB (equivalent to a one-category worsening) increase in HL was associated with a -1.53 (95% CI, -2.11, -0.94) raw score point difference in the DSST, adjusting for demographics, hearing aid use, and cardiovascular disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,277 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
HI is associated with increased risk of developing dementia in older adults. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
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 →