We found disparities between black and white residents with ADRD both within and across facilities. 5 key findings →
Participants: 665,033 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.
Nearly 40% of patients with dementia in our study experienced live discharge or a long length of stay. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although patient factors remain associated with differential healthcare utilization at the end of life, utilization declined over time and use of palliative care services increased. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Prognostic discussions between caregivers of PwD and the PwD's physicians may be occurring more often; however, a high percentage of caregivers report a poor understanding about the terminal nature of dementia and the role of PC. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 80 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The in vivo measure of cerebral amyloidosis known as [(11)C]PiB is associated with cross-sectional regionally specific brain atrophy and longitudinal cognitive decline in multiple cognitive domains that occur before the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 135 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These results indicate an association between brain hypoperfusion and the dementia of AD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The aims of this study were to examine the relationships of hippocampal T2 (HCT2) relaxation time and magnetic resonance (MR)-based hippocampal volume (HCV) to neuronal (ND) and glial cell densities (GD) of hippocampal neuronal cell layers, and to obtain a better clinicopathological definition of hippocampal sclerosis (HS) and end folium sclerosis (EFS). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The epsilon4 allele of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene confers an increased risk for the development of AD. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The hippocampus is one of the earliest affected brain regions in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and its dysfunction is believed to underlie the core feature of the disease-memory impairment. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Building on well-established animal data demonstrating the effects of early maternal support on hippocampal development and adaptive coping, a few longitudinal studies suggest that early caregiver support also impacts human hippocampal development. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
55/100
We determined the frequency of dementia in a cohort of 251 patients aged greater than or equal to 60 years hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke, based on examinations performed 3 months after stroke onset. 5 key findings →
Participants: 251 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Arterial spin labeling (ASL) is a non-invasive MRI technique to measure cerebral blood flow (CBF). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
55/100
Uncontrolled diabetes increases the risk of Alzheimer's disease and VaD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,248 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults with dementia who take atypical antipsychotics have a similar risk of ischaemic stroke to those taking typical antipsychotics. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, whether large perivascular spaces (L-PVSs) (>3 mm in diameter) visible on MRI are associated with SVD and cognitive deterioration in older individuals is unknown. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,612 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The small effect of VRFs and LAD on WMH suggests that WMH have a large "nonvascular," nonatheromatous etiology. 3 key findings →
Participants: 881 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There are specific risk factors associated with feeding tube placement in nursing home residents with severe cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although concerns about increased bleeding risk with combined warfarin-antiplatelet therapy are not unfounded, the risk of bleeding is moderately increased. 2 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our data suggest that cardiovascular risk factors may modulate the clinical expression of CADASIL. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
At baseline, subjects with normal vs. impaired cognition show no notable difference in microbiome diversity but several unique microbial signatures are detected in subjects with mild cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) amyloid-β peptide (Aβ)42/Aβ40 and the concentration of tau phosphorylated at site 181 (p-tau181) are well-established biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Participants: 263 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Increasing variation greatly impacted the performance of plasma Aβ42/40 in discriminating Aβ status. 1 key finding →
Participants: 50 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurodegenerative biomarkers were elevated to levels observed in AD dementia and associated with encephalopathy and worse outcomes among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. 5 key findings →
Participants: 251 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Blood phosphorylated tau (p-tau) biomarkers, at differing sites, demonstrate high accuracy to detect Alzheimer's disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Participants: 214 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using a targeted proteomics approach, we confirmed previous findings for a subset of markers, defined longitudinal performance of our panel of markers, and established a flexible proteomics method for robust multiplexed analyses. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
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 →