Few nutritional interventions were found to convincingly improve cognition of individuals with MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 500 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
A total of 21,788 citations were screened, and seven studies of diverse quality were included in the review, comprising 1,691 participants. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,691 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, mental and neurological disorders were associated with a significant high risk of infection (pre-existing mental: OR 1·67, 95% CI 1·12-2·49; and pre-existing neurological: 2·05, 1·58-2·67), illness severity (mental: pre-existing, 1·40, 1·25-1·57; sequelae, 4·85, 2·53-9·32; neurological: pre-existing, 1·43, 1·09-1·88; sequelae, 2·17, 1·45-3·24), and mortality (mental: pre-existing, 1·47, 1·26-1·72; neurological: pre-existing, 2·08, 1·61-2·69; sequelae, 2·03, 1·66-2·49) from COVID-19. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 149 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite older racial and ethnic minorities (REMs) being more likely to develop dementia they are underrepresented in clinical trials focused on neurological disorders. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 100,748 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There was no significant difference in days spent at home between the specialist unit and standard care groups (median 51 v 45 days, 95% confidence interval for difference -12 to 24; P=0.3). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 600 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
MCR is associated with an increased risk of falls. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 6,204 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Early identification and management of OD should consider geriatric syndromes and neurogenic comorbidities to prevent malnutrition and pneumonia and reduce mortality in adults aged 60 years and older. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 31,488 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
79/100
Older people who view a video depiction of a patient with advanced dementia after hearing a verbal description of the condition are more likely to opt for comfort as their goal of care compared with those who solely listen to a verbal description. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 106 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all the potential studies we identified as a result of the search strategy. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 99 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our educational intervention increased ACP initiation, and the number of nonmedical and medical preferences discussed. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 140 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Emergency department (ED)-initiated palliative care has been shown to improve patient-centred outcomes in older adults with serious, life-limiting illnesses. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 1,350 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
451 (11%) of 4241 beds in ten hospitals were included in the analyses. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 118 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Consortium is a collaborative network of researchers working together on a range of large-scale studies that integrate data from 70 institutions worldwide. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 12,826 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Identifying genetic variants influencing human brain structures may reveal new biological mechanisms underlying cognition and neuropsychiatric illness. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 21,151 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Lower intakes of nutrient-dense foods and higher intakes of unhealthy foods are each independently associated with smaller left hippocampal volume. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 255 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 14 placebo-controlled trials of elderly patients with dementia reporting a total global outcome score that includes symptoms such as psychosis, mood alterations, and aggression, small but statistically significant effects sizes ranging from 0.12 and 0.20 were observed for aripiprazole, olanzapine, and risperidone. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,000 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results revealed that both TMS and tDCS elicit a small trans-diagnostic effect on working memory, tDCS also improved attention/vigilance across diagnoses. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,784 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
WMH were associated with increased risk of cognitive dysfunction and could become a neuroimaging indicator of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 19,040 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Twenty-three articles were included in the systematic review, and 21 in the meta-analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 7,000 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our objectives were to investigate the utility of the Hachinski Ischemic Score (HIS) in differentiating patients with pathologically verified Alzheimer's disease (AD), multi-infarct dementia (MID), and "mixed" (AD plus cerebrovascular disease) dementia, and to identify the specific items of the HIS that best discriminate those dementia subtypes. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 312 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
White matter hyperintensities are associated with an increased risk of all-dementia and Alzheimer's disease in the general population. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,913 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These results provide new insight into the genetic basis of habitual PA, and the genetic links connecting PA with other traits and diseases. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 8,556 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In the replication stage, we performed genotyping of significant and suggestive results from the discovery stage. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,743 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Solanezumab, which targets monomeric amyloid in persons with elevated brain amyloid levels, did not slow cognitive decline as compared with placebo over a period of 240 weeks in persons with preclinical Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 1,169 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We report the case of a 79-year-old woman with Alzheimer's disease who participated in a Phase III randomized controlled trial called CLARITY-AD testing the experimental drug lecanemab. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
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 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.
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 27,780 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 →