Evidence is emerging that greater exposure to airborne pollutants is associated with increased risk of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study 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.
PM2.5 exposure may contribute to WM loss in older women. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Air pollution exposure may exacerbate AD development. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Smoking, head injury, pesticide exposure, and farming are potential risk factors for idiopathic REM sleep behavior disorder. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study Participants: 694 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Current evidence for an association between ambient ozone exposure and mental health outcomes is inconclusive and further high quality studies are needed to assess any potential links given the strong biologic plausibility. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Long-term exposure to PM 2.5 contributed to the development of cognitive decline, which may be partly explained by brain amyloid accumulation indicative of increased AD risk. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 31,573 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
66/100
Early age at surgical menopause was associated with cognitive decline and AD neuropathology. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,884 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Median survival was much lower than in screened populations. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Counseling and support lead to sustained benefits in reducing depressive symptoms in spouse-caregivers of Alzheimer's disease patients and should be widely available to provide effective, evidence-based intervention for family caregivers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The MDS-ADL Long Form scale detected clinically meaningful change in physical function in a large cohort of long-stay nursing home residents with moderate to severe dementia, supporting its use as a research tool in future studies. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 7,001 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Florbetaben scans were assessed visually and quantitatively, and results were compared with amyloid plaque scores. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 82 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To assess the risk of hip fracture associated with the use of four classes of psychotropic drugs, we performed a case-control study of 1021 patients with hip fractures and 5606 controls among elderly Medicaid enrollees. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 1,021 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
For effective treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD), it is important to identify subjects who are most likely to exhibit rapid cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 139 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The findings of this large cohort study suggest that system-level measurement and reporting of specific low-value services is feasible, enables cross-system comparisons, and reveals a broad range of low-value care use. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurodegenerative disease in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was observed. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 8,640 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Preventable hospital readmissions have been recognized as indicators of hospital quality, a source of increased healthcare expenditures, and a burden for patients, families, and caregivers. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,133 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Increased exposure to urban green space was associated with reduced incidence of dementia and stroke. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 219,013 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
66/100
Men, racial and ethnic minority individuals, older adults, and those with language barriers are at increased risk for undertreatment of depression. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
66/100
In this cohort study of data from 8.38 million adults (4.18 million women, 4.20 million men; mean [SD] age 49.18 [18.45] years); 16 679 (0.02%) survived a hospital admission for SARI, and 32 525 (0.03%) survived a hospital admission for COVID-19. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Careful consideration of model specification and the profound effects of mortality selection in the older adult population is essential when investigating the relationship between aging-related diseases such as cancer and AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 92,425 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
NFTs in the substantia nigra are associated with gait impairment in older persons with and without dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 86 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A MoCA cutoff score of 23, rather than the initially recommended score of 26, lowers the false positive rate and shows overall better diagnostic accuracy. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Layer II of the entorhinal cortex contains the cells of origin for the perforant path, plays a critical role in memory processing, and consistently degenerates in end-stage Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 29 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ABSTRACTObjective:To compare the accuracy of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in tracking mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's Disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
66/100
Plasma p-tau biomarkers had a greater diagnostic performance and larger effect sizes compared to t-tau and Aβ42/40 assays in detecting Aβ pathology. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 197 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →