Poorer OI in older adults without dementia was associated with increased risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,428 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Our findings suggest a high global dementia prevalence in LAC countries and an unequal burden of dementia for women, lower-educated, and rural residents. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this large cohort of older adults, long-term PM2.5 exposure was associated with increased dementia incidence. 3 key findings →
Participants: 541 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Beneficiaries had an average age of 75.3 years and were predominately female (59%) and non-Hispanic whites (93%). 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,002 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Further studies should bridge the gap in understanding and give a more global portrait by adding important personal variables such as dementia, organizational variables such as use of community and primary care, and contextual variables such as social and economic frailty. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Telemental health (TMH) for older patients has the potential to increase access to geriatric specialists, reduce travel times for patients and providers, and reduce ever growing healthcare costs. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
We found no statistically significant difference in measures of WM injury by race and ethnicity after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors and socioeconomic status. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,036 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
The ACE is a brief and reliable bedside instrument for early detection of dementia, and offers a simple objective index to differentiate AD and FTD in mildly demented patients. 2 key findings →
Participants: 115 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Considering predementia stages, the number of persons with AD is much larger than conveyed in available literature. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Women who underwent either unilateral or bilateral oophorectomy before the onset of menopause had an increased risk of cognitive impairment or dementia compared to referent women (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.46; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.90; adjusted for education, type of interview, and history of depression). 2 key findings →
Participants: 813 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
60/100
Participants were most likely to develop depression, apathy, or anxiety, and least likely to develop elation or disinhibition. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Contrary to previous reports, head trauma was not a risk factor for AD, and smoking did not protect against AD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Our prognostic index, which used 6 risk factors known at discharge and a simple additive point system to stratify medical patients 70 years or older according to 1-year mortality after hospitalization, had good discrimination and calibration and generalized well in an independent sample of patients at a different site. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,495 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Twenty-two percent of the participants aged 75 years or older had MCI. 2 key findings →
Participants: 927 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These data demonstrate that YKL-40, a putative indicator of neuroinflammation, is elevated in AD and, together with Aβ42, has potential prognostic utility as a biomarker for preclinical AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 47 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dramatic increases in the numbers of "oldest old" (aged 85 years and older) across all racial and ethnic groups will also significantly affect the numbers of people living with AD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 200,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Recent findings of a linkage between high blood pressure (BP) and later development of dementia have given new prospects on cerebral target-organ damage in hypertension and have added substance to the concept of "preventable senility." 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 70 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There was, as expected, a significant association between C9ORF72 mutations and presence of motor neuron disease. 5 key findings →
Participants: 398 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
Smaller hippocampi and specifically CA1 and subicular involvement are associated with increased risk for conversion from MCI to AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
60/100
Dementia, depression and anxiety disorders are the most common psychiatric disorders among older adults in LTC. 3 key findings →
Participants: 74 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Selective survival of men with a healthier cardiovascular risk profile and hence lower propensity to dementia might partly explain the higher LTR of dementia/AD in women. 1 key finding →
Participants: 7,901 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) showed a high probability to be diagnosed with Alzheimer dementia (AD) after 30 months. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,505 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Having multiple CMBs or concomitant CMBs and retinopathy is associated with a profile of vascular cognitive impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,906 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
60/100
The hippocampus is involved at the onset of the neuropathological pathways leading to Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This simple and feasible cognitive impairment prediction model could identify community-dwelling elderly people at the greatest 3-year risk for cognitive impairment, which could help community nurses in the early identification of dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: prospective cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →