27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Despite recent advances in the treatment of obesity, lifestyle medicine remains foundational to the treatment of individuals with obesity, regardless of the modality chosen by the patient with the guidance of the clinician they are working with, including in conjunction with, as appropriate, anti-obesity medications and metabolic surgery. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Female gender, older age, and lower levels of education were associated with poorer overall test scores. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vision impairment is common among older adults and affects dementia screening assessments, which include visually presented items. 5 key findings →
Participants: 86 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early detection of cognitive decline in older adults is essential for implementing timely interventions. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 90 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our findings support speech-based cognitive assessments as a promising avenue towards remote MCI screening, with implications for scalable screening in clinical trials and healthcare. 3 key findings →
Participants: 110 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the top 20 acoustic features, our framework achieved classification accuracies of 62.2% (EER: 0.3335) on the FHS dataset for NC, MCI, and DE differentiation, and 63.7% (EER: 0.1796) on the DBD dataset for NC and MCI differentiation, using obfuscated speech files. 5 key findings →
Participants: 128 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Neuropsychological interviews and neuroimaging techniques are traditional diagnostic methods for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Linear mixed modelling of time effects found progression of all CBI-R domains, aside from sleep, beliefs and mood domains, and all ACE-III domains. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Also, there are no licensed treatments specifically for VD.[3] What sets VD apart from other dementias are the following factors: The etiology of VD is clearly associated with brain tissue loss and dysfunction secondary to vascular pathophysiology in which hypertension seems to be the main reason.[4] While the exact cellular mechanisms are still not clear, it does imply that VD may potentially be largely preventable through better cardiovascular-metabolic risk modification. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a progressive condition of a neurological brain disorder recognized by symptoms such as dementia, memory loss, alterations in behaviour, and impaired reasoning abilities. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a particular form of dementiacharacterized by a steady decline in brain function and cognitive abilities, leading to memory loss, disorientation, and trouble doing daily tasks. 3 key findings →
Participants: 6,400 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Eighty-three Black (mean 72±10.8-years-old, 63% female, 33% cognitively impaired) and 27 Latino participants (mean 65.8-years-old, 56% female, 11% cognitively impaired) completed neuroimaging. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 83 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One hundred and fifty rules were found for caregivers with a moderate to severe burden, and these rules can be further summarized into twenty general rules. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 585 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The implementation of needs assessments was associated with increased long-term care (LTC) service utilization. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Implementation efforts resulted in the adoption of the Care Ecosystem at 28 health systems and eight community-based organizations, including 22 participants in Medicare's Guiding an Improved Dementia Experience (GUIDE) payment model. 5 key findings →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
People with dementia were on average 80.6 years old, mostly female (56%) and mildly to moderately cognitively impaired (85%). 98.6% of the participants had at least one need, of which just over a third (36.5%) were rated as met and just under two-thirds (63.5%) as unmet. 5 key findings →
Participants: 417 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Eighty respondents (8.1%) care for 90 individuals with neurocognitive disorders, a majority of whom are parents of the respondent. 5 key findings →
Participants: 982 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between 1992-2021, global AD cases increased from 4.078 million to 9.837 million, while the global age-standardised incidence rate (ASIR) remained relatively stable, rising slightly from 117.7 to 119.8 per 100 000. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recommendations vary by medication type and symptom severity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While educational disparities in dementia incidence are well-known, whether and to what extent they persist beyond dementia onset is less explored. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older adults in rural India experience higher social isolation due to limited social and healthcare resources. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 71,513 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study cohort included 17,398 AI/AN adults aged ≥ 65 years who were dementia-free at baseline, of whom 59.8% were female. 5 key findings →
Participants: 17,398 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
length of stay, need for a higher level of care, and mortality after discharge in patients with and without delirium. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 33 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Measures of cognition were especially important predictive features of clinical diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The ten top-funded companies offering DDLS received a total funding of EUR 128.52 million, of which three companies collected more than 75%. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →