27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among Aβ-positive individuals, greater CR related to attenuated clinical progression in predementia stages of AD, but accelerated cognitive decline after the onset of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 175 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found that accelerated increase in tau-PET signal was observed in amyloid-β-positive mild cognitive impairment (3.0 ± 5.3%) and Alzheimer's disease dementia (2.9 ± 5.7%), respectively, when compared to either amyloid-β-negative cognitively unimpaired (0.4 ± 2.7%), amyloid-β-negative mild cognitive impairment (-0.4 ± 2.3%) or amyloid-β-positive cognitively unimpaired (1.2 ± 2.8%). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 157 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which cognitive training via interactive computerised technology was compared with an active or inactive control intervention. 5 key findings →
Participants: 660 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Suboptimal sleep causes cognitive decline and probably accelerates Alzheimer's Disease (AD) progression. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,056 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Coding variants in the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) are associated with late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Variants of the gene triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-2 (TREM2) increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other neurodegenerative disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is used to modulate the activity of dysfunctional brain circuits. 4 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Peripheral inflammatory markers are elevated in patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 5,217 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We evaluated the performance of CSF biomarkers for predicting risk of clinical decline and conversion to dementia in non-demented patients with cognitive symptoms. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 619 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cholinergic deficits might contribute to vascular cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Participants: 86 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia is a progressive syndrome of global cognitive impairment with significant health and social care costs. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 9,422 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is a well-established group psychosocial intervention for people with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Periventricular white matter hyperintensities (WMH; PVWMH) and deep WMH (DWMH) are regional classifications of WMH and reflect proposed differences in cause. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 26,654 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Healthy cognitive ageing is a societal and public health priority. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22,059 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The APOE-ε4 allele has long been associated with increased risks of Alzheimer's disease and mortality, but the effect of the less prevalent APOE-ε2 allele on diseases in the elderly and survival remains elusive. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 38,537 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The lack of strong association between brain beta-amyloid deposition and cognitive impairment has been a challenge for the Alzheimer's disease (AD) field. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 678 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
GRN mutations cause progranulin haploinsufficiency, which eventually leads to frontotemporal dementia (FTD-GRN). 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a heterogeneous neurodegenerative disease, whose etiology results from a complex interplay between environmental and genetic factors. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 76 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Olink Proteomics panel of inflammation markers ( https://www.olink.com/products/inflammation/ ) will be used to evaluate 92 proteins associated with inflammatory diseases and related biological processes. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Participants: 50 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found up to 270-fold genetic enrichment between FTD and RA, up to 160-fold genetic enrichment between FTD and UC, up to 180-fold genetic enrichment between FTD and T1D, and up to 175-fold genetic enrichment between FTD and CeD. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 192,886 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of cognitive training, specifically computerized cognitive training (CCT) and virtual reality cognitive training (VRCT), programs for individuals living with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia and therefore at high risk of cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 16 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, the results of recent studies using semi-immersive virtual reality (VR)-assisted cognitive training are inconsistent. 5 key findings →
Participants: 23 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
They provide initial evidence that cognitive training may be an efficacious approach toward improving balance and gait in older adults known to have a history of falls. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 45 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is a highly invalidating condition and, given the progressive aging of the population, one of the major issues that health systems will have to face in future years. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Diet has been hypothesized to be associated with neurodegenerative disorders. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis 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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →