Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common form of dementia, characterized by progressive cognitive impairment and neurodegeneration. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
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.
Nine female-specific associations were identified and replicated, involving ADGRV1, OR3A3, IFI27L1, LYRM1, STAP2, TSTD2, PDYN, and TMEM50B. We observed the preponderance of protective female-specific associations in neurons. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Chronological age offers an imperfect estimate of the molecular changes that occur with aging. 4 key findings →
Participants: 4,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Tau positron emission tomography (PET) imaging allows in vivo detection of tau proteinopathy in Alzheimer's disease, which is associated with neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Participants: 12,048 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Thirty-eight (68%) patients who consented to PET imaging had PS-MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 178 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
63/100
Carriers (n = 39) and noncarriers (n = 36) had similar neuropsychological performance, except for lower Letter Digit Substitution Test scores in carriers. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 39 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA) occurred in 11.2% (10/89) with lecanemab and 13.3% (11/83) with donanemab-less than in pivotal trials. 5 key findings →
Participants: 89 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, 214,442 matched individuals initiated GLP-1 RAs or DPP4i (109,731 women, mean age 58.6 years [SD 12], and mean HbA1c 7.7% [1.4]). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), originally developed for type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity, are increasingly recognized for their significant impact on the central nervous system, leading to reports of both beneficial and adverse mental health effects. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The total sample consisted of 33 clinically diagnosed AD patients taking galantamine 8 mg/d for 6 months. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, 12 489 patients initiating SGLT2 inhibitor treatment (51.9% dapagliflozin and 48.1% empagliflozin) and 1075 patients initiating dulaglutide treatment were included. 5 key findings →
Participants: 489 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This mini-narrative review explores the relationship between diabetes and dementia, focusing on the potential mitigating role of metformin in reducing cognitive decline among individuals with type 2 diabetes. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Currently, 1549 participants have been screened, and 815 randomized. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,549 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 1,310 older adults who reported hearing loss (25% 80-84 years, 51% women, 74% White), 22% with dementia and 57% baseline hearing aid use. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The prevalence of hearing impairment and dementia increases with age but the nature of their association remains unclear. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Multivariable linear regressions showed an association of metabolic syndrome with lower performance in attention (β=1.62 seconds, 95% CI=0.20, 3.04) and memory (β=-0.62 words, 95% CI=-1.19, -0.05) that could be driven by associations with elevated fasting glucose and abdominal obesity. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,077 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
63/100
among VRFs-free participants, TC (HR 0.62, 95%CI 0.40-0.95) and LDL-C (HR 0.47, 95%CI 0.28-0.80) were inversely associated with incident dementia, LDL-C was inversely associated with incident AD (HR 0.50, 95%CI 0.28-0.90). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
63/100
To examine the association between blood cholesterol concentrations and Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the Chinese elderly. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 117 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A+/High-EA individuals exhibited slower cognitive decline in global cognition and language domains than A+/Low-EA individuals. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In weighted models, greater loneliness was associated with microinfarcts, lower episodic and working memory in the absence of AD pathology, lower working memory in the absence of infarcts, a stronger association of infarcts with lower episodic memory, and a stronger association of microinfarcts with lower working and semantic memory. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 680 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study included 407 participants (96 Thal, 405 Braak, and 406 CERAD). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 407 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most participants self-reported good social health (92%) with very few socially isolated (2%), with low social support (2%) or lonely (5%). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
SDI score (aHR = 1.08; 95% CI 0.96, 1.22), joint air pollution (aHR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.92, 1.16) and joint SDI with air pollution (aHR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.89, 1.22) were not associated with dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Participants: 5,397 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
63/100
Evidence regarding the association of specific air pollutants with vascular dementia (VaD) risk is limited. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 831 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most risk factors under study (i.e., hyperglycemia, unhealthy diet, lower cardiorespiratory fitness, smoking, alcohol consumption, and hypertension) were significantly associated with lower retinal sensitivity and lower RNFL thickness. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 5,666 Evidence: low
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 →