Of 541 identified studies, 34 were included in the analysis. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Compared to CN counterparts, patients with MCI have higher proportion of families Sclerotiniaceae, Phaffomyceteceae, Trichocomaceae, Cystofilobasidiaceae, Togniniaceae and genera Botrytis, Kazachstania, Phaeoacremonium and Cladosporium and lower abundance of Meyerozyma. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Reliable information on rate of progression of cognitive impairment in probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important for evaluating possible beneficial effects of therapeutic agents and in planning long-term care for patients with this chronic illness. 1 key finding →
Participants: 430 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Statistically significant preoperative factors independently associated with not wearing a prosthesis in order of greatest to least risk were nonambulatory before amputation (OR, 9.5), above knee amputation (OR, 4.4), age > 60 years (OR, 2.7), homebound but ambulatory status (OR, 3.0), presence of dementia (OR, 2.4), end-stage renal disease (OR, 2.3), and coronary artery disease (OR, 2.0). 4 key findings →
Participants: 553 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Fever episodes in 104 institutionalized patients with Alzheimer's disease were prospectively evaluated to determine the impact of antibiotic treatment on fever outcomes. 3 key findings →
Participants: 75 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
Mortality patterns in 2007, such as the decline in the age-adjusted death rate to a record historical low, were generally consistent with long-term trends. 1 key finding →
Participants: 2,423,712 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
In this study, the authors evaluated whether the association between low educational level and increased risk of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia may be explained by occupation-based socioeconomic status (SES). 5 key findings →
Participants: 101 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Growing epidemiological evidence suggests that premorbid participation in cognitive leisure activities (CLA) reduces the risk of dementia by increasing cognitive reserve. 3 key findings →
Participants: 500 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Parkinson's disease (PD), following Alzheimer's disease, is the second-most common neurodegenerative disorder in the United States. 5 key findings →
Participants: 630,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Just under a half of the expected numbers of patients with dementia are recognised in GP dementia registers. 4 key findings →
Participants: 351 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although persons with dementia are frequently hospitalized, relatively little is known about the health profile, patterns of health care use, and mortality rates for patients with dementia who access care in the emergency department (ED). 4 key findings →
Participants: 10,354 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Progressive atrophy was revealed in presymptomatic individuals, with posterior cingulate and neocortical temporoparietal cortical losses, and medial temporal-lobe atrophy. 1 key finding →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Normalized thickness index at baseline differed significantly among all the four diagnosis groups (P < 0.001) and correctly distinguished Alzheimer's disease patients from healthy controls with an 85% cross-validated accuracy. 2 key findings →
Participants: 122 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neurodegenerative diseases are associated with profound changes in social and emotional function. 3 key findings →
Participants: 148 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
STOPP criteria PIMs, unlike Beers criteria PIMs, are significantly associated with avoidable ADEs in older people that cause or contribute to urgent hospitalization. 5 key findings →
Participants: 600 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
48/100
By using fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET of the brain, a deep learning algorithm developed for early prediction of Alzheimer disease achieved 82% specificity at 100% sensitivity, an average of 75.8 months prior to the final diagnosis. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,002 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We built and validated a deep learning algorithm predicting the individual diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment who will convert to AD (c-MCI) based on a single cross-sectional brain structural MRI scan. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The precise mechanisms that lead to cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease are unknown. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Astrocytes are crucial to brain homeostasis, yet their changes along the spatiotemporal progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) neuropathology remain unexplored. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In the field of computer-aided Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnosis, jointly identifying brain diseases and predicting clinical scores using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) have attracted increasing attention since these two tasks are highly correlated. 1 key finding →
Participants: 1,984 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) are more likely to experience earlier onset of multiple facets of physiological aging. 3 key findings →
Participants: 46 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The incidence of hip fracture appears to be associated with benzodiazepine use. 3 key findings →
Participants: 125 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Community-based, commercially insured, older adults with probable dementia are more likely to take anticholinergics than matched controls. 2 key findings →
Participants: 418 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
More than half of nursing home residents suffer from dementia, which is about 19-fold higher than the prevalence in insured living in the community. 1 key finding →
Participants: 213,694 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Admission trends show that new residents were older and had greater multimorbidity and limitations in physical functioning over time. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events