27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The mean rate of brain atrophy per year was 0.76% [95% CI, 0.63-0.90] in the active treatment group and 1.08% [0.94-1.22] in the placebo group (P = 0.001). 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 271 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although recent clinical trials targeting amyloid-β in Alzheimer's disease have shown promising results, there is increasing evidence suggesting that understanding alternative disease pathways that interact with amyloid-β metabolism and amyloid pathology might be important to halt the clinical deterioration. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 75 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
However, some (like tacrine) are associated with adverse effects such as hepatotoxicity, but donepezil (E2020, Aricept) is safer. 5 key findings →
Participants: 4,365 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Tacrine, the first of the cholinesterase inhibitors to undergo extensive trials for this purpose, was associated with significant adverse effects including hepatotoxicity. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,370 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This meta-analysis provides evidence that CCT improves cognitive function in older people with MCI. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 690 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The possibilities of computer-based cognitive training (CCT) in postponing the onset of dementia are currently unclear, but promising. 4 key findings →
Participants: 631 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings suggest that higher adherence to the MIND diet was associated with better cognitive function and potentially slower cognitive decline in later life. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 4,066 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The included studies (n=15) assessed change in cognition in response to a multidomain lifestyle intervention. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This pilot study showed that functional tasks exercise using simulated functional tasks as a means of combined cognitive and exercise program is feasible and beneficial in improving the memory and functional status of older adults with mild cognitive impairment as well as reducing the care-related burdens of their caregivers. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 59 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia prevalence is a global public health concern. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Transferring a lifestyle intervention from a trial-setting to real life requires knowledge about the factors that influence effective implementation. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 27 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our study confirmed the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving cognition or slowing down the progression of cognitive impairment in AD patients and recommended several interventions for clinical practice. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 682 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A 6-week robot-assisted, multi-domain cognitive training program can improve the efficiency of global cognitive function and depression during cognitive tasks in older adults with MCI, which is associated with improvements in memory and executive function. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 90 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
27-OH appears to be a marker not only for dementia/AD risk, but also for monitoring the effects of preventive interventions on cholesterol metabolism. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 47 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review suggests the advantage of combined interventions over exercise with comparable effects when compared with cognitive interventions in the population with mild cognitive impairment and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 2,910 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The cognitive impairment cohort (n = 14,175) included participants without evidence of impairment at baseline who underwent follow-up testing. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 14,175 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results obtained will provide information on the applicability of these multidomain intervention programs to at-risk elderly people. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 150 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Greater MIND diet adherence was associated with decreased risk of cognitive impairment in female participants but not male participants, with no difference between Black participants and White participants. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 14,145 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pain is inversely associated with cognitive function in older adults, but the effects of pain on cognitive decline are not fully clear. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 688 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Obesity has been linked to cognitive impairment, cognitive decline and dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 180 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
At week 32, compared with patients assigned to placebo (59 assessed), those assigned to rivastigmine (55 assessed) had improved step time variability for normal walking (ratio of geometric means 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.88; p=0.002) and the simple dual task (0.79; 0.62-0.99; p=0.045). 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 130 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We sought to determine the frequency and prognosis of persistent delirium (PerD) in older hospital patients by systematically reviewing original research on this topic. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,322 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients possessed above risk factors might be high-risk patients. 3 key findings →
Participants: 104,572 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study provides preliminary evidence that falls among community-dwelling older adults are associated with factors such as age, female gender, fear of falling, history of falls, unclear vision, depression, and balance disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings suggested high prevalence and detrimental impact of DSD in hospitalized older adults, highlighting a need for early identification, prevention, and treatments. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 81 Evidence: high
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 27,380 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 →