Subjects with PD-SCD do not consistently show cognitive decline, but rather exhibit a heterogeneous progression. 4 key findings →
Participants: 198 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In men, increasing depressive symptoms were associated with significantly steeper rates of cognitive decline, as measured by global cognitive and functional outcomes, and with an increased risk of dementia compared to consistently low depressive symptoms. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 811 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Blood biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease (AD) are promising for dementia prediction, but their association with progression across intermediate stages of cognitive decline in the general population remains unclear. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the within-language condition, combined speech timing and lexico-semantic features yielded maximal classification (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC]=0.88), outperforming single-feature models (AUC=0.79 for timing features; AUC=0.80 for lexico-semantic features). 5 key findings →
Participants: 211 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 893 participants with average age 93 years (range 90-102), 43 % had SMC. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 893 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a year-long, home-based individual cognitive stimulation (iCS) program on cognitive performance, mood, functional independence, and quality of life (QoL) in older adults with mild Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 18 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over 13.45 years, 992 all-cause dementia cases were recorded. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 118,963 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Seizures in people with dementia (PWD) are associated with faster cognitive decline and worse clinical outcomes. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 490 783 participants, 21 468 (47.6% women) experienced an incident sepsis hospitalization. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 783 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Cytosolic aggregation of the RNA binding protein TDP-43 (transactive response DNA-binding protein 43) is a hallmark of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and frontotemporal dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
Motor neuron hyperexcitability is a broadly observed yet poorly understood feature of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Pathological inclusions of the C-terminal domain (CTD) of TAR DNA binding protein-43 (TDP-43) are neurodegenerative hallmarks in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia, yet CTD's aggregation propensity complicates structural characterization of native TDP-43. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Polyphenols, naturally occurring phytonutrients found in plant-based foods, have attracted significant attention for their potential therapeutic effects in neurological diseases and neuroinflammation. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There have been 23 studies (completed or reported as ongoing) of multidomain interventions for AD, including 19 RCTs. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In total, 156 individuals were assessed for eligibility, and 79 (51%) were recruited (mean age 61.6 ± 6.9 (range 60-75) years; 68% male). 5 key findings →
Participants: 156 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
=0.03), indicating improved executive function. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 33 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frailty status (prefrail/frail n = 520, robust n = 625) at baseline did not modify the effect of intervention on global cognition during the 2-year follow-up (P-value for frailty × intervention × time interaction > .05). 5 key findings →
Participants: 520 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 2540 records were screened. We included 10 studies. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 2,540 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
In total, 945 were included patients, and 28.1% (n = 266) had dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 266 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
Participants included 202 physicians and three nurse specialists who assumed similar medical responsibilities. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 202 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 2935 patients (50.4% women; mean age=72.2 years; 19.8% subjective cognitive impairment, 39.8% mild cognitive impairment, and 40.4% dementia), larger WMH volume within projection fibres (B=0.24, SE=0.10, p=0.013) was associated with greater apathy. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,935 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cerebral small vessel disease (cSVD) is a leading cause of stroke and dementia with no specific treatment, of which molecular mechanisms remain poorly understood. 2 key findings →
Participants: 40,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52/100
Diabetes was not associated with brain atrophy cross-sectionally or longitudinally. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 112 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study included 3540 participants with RVC data and 489 with WMH data (median [IQR] age: 73.2 [71.4-76.3] and 72.5 [71.2-75.4] years; female: 52.9% and 47.6%) over a median follow-up of 7.4 [IQR 5.5-8.5] and 3.8 [IQR 2.9-5.3] years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,540 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Out of 462,327 eligible participants, those with constipation were associated with higher incidence of three outcome diseases (1415/20,263 [7.0%]) than those without (18,848/442,064 [4.3%]), with adjusted hazard ratio (HR) being 1.35 [1.27-1.42]. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort 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 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.
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 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 →