No association between cadmium exposure and dementia incidence was observed. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 6,122 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among 10,666 patients (mean age 76.6 years; 35% female; 70% White, 21% Black), phenotype distribution was: A, 9.4%; B, 7.1%; C, 50.7%; D, 32.7%. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 824 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previous studies have shown that AD-related costs are mainly driven by long-term informal care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In fixed-effects panel models that accounted for spending persistence, lagged DALYs were not statistically associated with subsequent spending. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Both classes act on neuronal calcium signaling, raising the question of whether their combined use is associated with greater cognitive risk than gabapentin alone. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 33,791 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Higher prevalence was observed in the ID group relative to the general population for epilepsy, young-onset ADRD, and their comorbidity. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 847,430 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with dementia were more likely to be frail, comorbid, and not receive standard-of-care neoadjuvant chemotherapy. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
POINTER reported a modest structured-versus-self-guided difference in the annual rate of global cognitive change. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 399 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These findings highlight that extensive long-term utilization of pain management strategies in older adults is associated with increased risks of adverse outcomes, particularly hospitalizations and incident dementia, especially among fit older adults, emphasizing the need for careful monitoring and personalized approaches to pain management in older populations, balancing effective pain control with minimization of potential long-term risks. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 24,539 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
16/100
Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for lecanemab versus standard of care were €296,506 per QALY gained, and €371,299 per QALY for donanemab, from the HSE payer perspective under HIQA guidelines. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sociodemographic and clinical variables routinely recorded in PC EHRs may contribute to dementia identification. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Evidence for interventions that reduce refusal is strongest for music during personal care and modified bathing methods, with some support for positive communication and person-centred approaches, though quality is generally low and few studies involve family caregivers in community settings. 5 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Symptom chronology emerged as a robust diagnostic discriminator, underscoring the clinical value of temporal disease trajectories. 3 key findings →
Participants: 932 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder that is characterized by structural changes of the hippocampus, thus hippocampal morphology becomes an important biomarker for early diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Implementation of an EHR-enabled AD care pathway was associated with improved adoption of guideline-concordant cognitive assessment and recommended diagnostic evaluation in primary care across three health systems. 5 key findings →
Participants: 10,206 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia public stigma was associated with education, dementia knowledge, media exposure, chronic diseases, and contact experience with people living with dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 3,055 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
16/100
Individuals with MCI and AD exhibit marked deficits in the performance and accuracy of upper-limb reaching and catching movements when assessed in a VR environment. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Medication adherence in older adults was strongly influenced by cognitive impairment, gender, health literacy and cohabitation. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Apathy and depression are among the most common neuropsychiatric symptoms in dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Multimodal integration of cognitive, neuroimaging, and polygenic data in the MHS-RWD tool yields strong discrimination for both early diagnosis of dementia and AD differential diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Participants: 1,100 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings suggest that serum brain-derived p-tau 217 and SV2A are more specific diagnostic biomarkers for reflecting brain damage and may not be disturbed by peripheral damage for AD patients. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,198 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Detection and characterisation of dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) is essential for diagnosis and to support recruitment of patients into trials of disease-targeted therapies. 1 key finding →
Participants: 46 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We used the September 2013 age-based rollout of the live-attenuated shingles vaccine in England as a natural experiment to estimate the effect of vaccine eligibility on shingles and dementia diagnoses in linked hospital records. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The retina displayed earlier and broader AD-related molecular alterations than the hippocampus. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Structured Abstract Background Alzheimer’s disease (AD) neuropathology emerges decades before symptoms, requiring sensitive, non-invasive markers for early diagnosis. 2 key findings →
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 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 →