27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
CCT is efficacious for overall and key cognitive domains in adults with MS, but efficacy on other outcomes and in progressive subtypes remains unclear. 2 key findings →
Participants: 982 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Computerized cognitive training significantly improved global cognitive function, which was supported by the improved brain plasticity. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study found that CT+Active tDCS did not produce greater memory improvement compared to CT+Sham tDCS. 5 key findings →
Participants: 68 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
SMART will provide a novel evaluation of the immediate and long term benefits of CT, PRT, and combined CT and PRT on global cognitive function and brain morphology, as well as potential underlying mechanisms of adaptation in older adults at risk of further cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advancing age increases the risk for diseases and health concerns like cognitive decline, constituting a major public health challenge. 1 key finding →
Participants: 631 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
If results from this study show benefits for cognition at trial completion, CCT programs, alone or in combination with walking, might be a strategy to promote healthy cognitive aging in older adults. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Midlife p-tau181 was associated with faster 11-year memory decline beginning 20 years later in the ARIC cohort, which underscores a potentially long prodromal phase of cognitive decline that could precede dementia onset. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 920 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings indicate that a 4-week simultaneous memory training and aerobic exercise program is sufficient to improve memory, attention, and reasoning abilities in older adults. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive training was effective in enhancing the overall cognitive functioning of less educated older adults with subjective memory complaints. 2 key findings →
Participants: 111 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Since our cognitive training showed beneficial effects, it could be a promising method to prevent POCD. 1 key finding →
Participants: 37 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this pilot study, RFM and the multi-domain approach CPR were feasible and had preliminary beneficial effects in older adults with MCI in primary care setting in Hong Kong. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The heterogeneous and multi-factorial nature of dementia requires the consideration of all health aspects when predicting the risk of its development and planning strategies for its prevention. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Quality of the reporting of trials varied. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,353 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The use of light propofol sedation decreased the prevalence of postoperative delirium by 50% compared with deep sedation. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 114 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The meta-analysis suggests a consistent moderate association between ADL and EF, supporting the growing evidence for a link between ADL and executive dysfunction in early dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 3,663 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Studies are heterogeneous in many aspects, including size sample, intervention, and instruments of measures. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 20 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Age and frailty are independently associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,711 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results of the present systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that the prevalence of OD is high in different populations and its trend has been increasing in recent years. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The evidence base on tools for detection of delirium superimposed on dementia is limited, although some existing tools show promise. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,569 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Faster alleviation of delirium and improved cognition justify good, comprehensive geriatric care for these patients although treatment produced no significant improvements in hard endpoints of prognosis. 4 key findings →
Participants: 87 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We collected a total of 29 prospective studies for the systematic literature review and meta-analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 29 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this 10-week, double-blind, fixed-dose study, elderly institutionalized patients with dementia and agitation were randomized (3:3:2) to quetiapine 200mg/day, 100mg/day, or placebo. 2 key findings →
Participants: 117 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A lower proportion of patients with cancer had palliative care initiated in the home (16 088 [14.5%]) compared with patients with chronic organ failure (6904 [32.8%]; absolute difference, -18.3%) or dementia (3922 [27.9%]; absolute difference, -13.4%). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 709 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings highlight the potential benefits of palliative care in some non-cancer illnesses. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,936 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
FCC facilitates a palliative approach to care. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial 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 →