57/100
Ninety-one reviews provided evidence on the impact of telemedicine in dementia care. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
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.
Among 143 331 older adults with dementia (83 536 [58.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 83.8 [7.5] years), 1312 (0.9%) received a feeding tube in hospital and 142 019 (99.1%) did not. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia poses a significant global health challenge for both clinicians and patients, impacting millions of individuals worldwide, yet its early diagnosis remains underexplored. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 415 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The weighted prevalence of dementia based on the 10/66 Diagnostic Research Group (DRG) criteria was 8.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.3-10.7) in the WiSE 2023 study compared to 10% in the WiSE 2013 study (95% CI: 8.7-11.5). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,010 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence links air pollution to dementia, yet its role in Lewy body dementia (LBD) remains unclear. 2 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Bariatric surgery was associated with a significantly reduced incidence of ADRD, evidenced by a subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) of 0.37 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15–0.89; P = 0.03). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 5,303 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Meta-analysis identified 44 CpGs and 44 differentially methylated regions consistently associated with time to dementia in both cohorts. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data from 1,272,495 individuals, with the mean age at diagnosis ranging from 76.8 years (South Korea) to 82.9 years (Germany), show that the overall median length of survival following recorded diagnosis ranges from 2.4 years (New Zealand) to 7.9 years (South Korea). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,272,495 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among our participants, aMCI and VCIND demonstrated prevalence of 14.83% and 2.71%, respectively, and annual incidence (per 1000 person-years) of 69.6 and 10.6, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,051 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Light Gradient-boosting Machine (LightGBM) achieved the highest performance in identifying agitation over an 8-day period with a sensitivity of 71.32% ± 7.38 and specificity of 75.28% ± 7.38. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 63 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 13,145 individuals with risk factor data between 2015 and 2018 (51.1% aged 18-44, 31.0% aged 45-64, and 17.9% aged ≥65 years; 51.5% female after survey-weighting). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 13,145 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In a meta-analysis of 2 one-sample MR studies, the odds ratio (OR) for 1-SD higher BMI in predicting vascular-related dementia was 1.63 (95% CI, 1.13-2.35). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 110 participants (mean [SD] age, 67.9 [4.6] years; 68 female [61.8%]) were randomized to the experimental group (n = 55) and the sham group (n = 55) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. 5 key findings →
Participants: 55 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
DTI-ALPS values were significantly lower compared to HC in both DLB (Estimate = -0.084 [-0.14 to -0.03], p = 0.004) and MCI-LB (Estimate = -0.058 [-0.11 to -0.002], p = 0.047) DTI-ALPS was also significantly associated with both baseline (t[147] = 2.22, p = 0.028) and longitudinal decline (t[127] = 2.41,p = 0.017) in cognitive score. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 32 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
We discovered a remarkable gender-specific difference in DEGs that distinguish P-MCI from S-MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 28 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the participants, 377 (93.5%) reported subjective memory complaints. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 403 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
We present a comprehensive global analysis of genetic variants associated with autosomal-dominant Alzheimer's disease (ADAD). 2 key findings →
Participants: 550 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 70 autopsied individuals (62 male, 8 female; mean [SD] age, 64.40 [13.94] years), 20 showed CTE-NC in the brain. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 14 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
UNDERLYING BIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS PNDs result from a complex interplay of multiple biological, genetic, and environmental factors (Table 1). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 7,900 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No adverse events occurred over the study period. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Personalized repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the precuneus (PC) is emerging as a new non-invasive therapeutic approach in treating Alzheimer’s disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
Poor oral health and genetic susceptibility have each been linked to dementia risk, but their joint effects and subtype-specific associations remain unclear. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 7,553 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study included 356,173 participants (median age 56 years; 53.69% female). 5 key findings →
Participants: 356,173 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We investigated whether a discrepancy between chronological and biological age in midlife and late-life is associated with cognition and dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 11,758 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
< 0.01). Using an operationalization of clinical criteria for LATE, 8.2% of participants with MCI or dementia from our tertiary memory clinic were classified as Possible-LATE, Probable-LATE, or LATE-AD. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study 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 →