Diabetes is a global health concern associated with complications such as cognitive decline and dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
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.
Little is known about whether cognitive assessments can be completed remotely by older adults at risk for dementia, and there is no consensus on which tool is best. 1 key finding →
Participants: 52 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
FAB-Ch scores were significantly lower in individuals with dementia compared to controls (p < .001). 5 key findings →
Participants: 288 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In the fully adjusted model, the odds ratio (OR) for persistent loneliness was 1.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10, 1.95). 5 key findings →
Participants: 9,389 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The advent of amyloid-β (Aβ) and tau PET imaging has revolutionized Alzheimer disease (AD) research, enabling in vivo detection of hallmark pathologies and transforming both diagnosis and therapeutic development. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This paper introduces a novel convolutional neural network model with an attention mechanism to advance Alzheimer disease (AD) classification using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
< 0.001), with the automated approach more likely to classify a scan as tau negative and lower agreement between methods in more severe cases and AD clinical variants. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
46/100
Traditional diagnostic methods for Alzheimer's disease often suffer from low accuracy and lengthy processing times, delaying crucial interventions and patient care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 0.120). These findings suggest that DESH and high EI, often considered biomarkers for iNPH, may lack specificity and may be found in a subset of patients with PSP or LBD leading to unnecessary neurosurgery for iNPH. 1 key finding →
Participants: 190 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
< 0.035), consistent with a neurodegenerative pattern. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
16% of individuals were identified as tau-accumulators. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 29 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These results provide clear evidence that CU older adults with both amyloid plaques and tau aggregates measured with PET will develop cognitive impairments if the disease is not stopped. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
46/100
Alzheimer's disease is associated with pre-symptomatic changes in brain morphometry and accumulation of abnormal tau and amyloid-beta pathology. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Within-day analyses revealed time with CRs was associated with increased HR, primarily due to negative interactions. 5 key findings →
Participants: 221 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia was significantly associated with caregiver burden related to emotional difficulty (odds ratio [OR] = 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-3.09) and physical difficulty (OR = 1.67, 95% CI, 1.01-2.78), but not financial difficulty. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,419 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Family caregivers provide essential care and support for individuals living with dementia, yet their contributions and needs are often unrecognized within formal health care systems. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In total, 3028 posts were retrieved, including 1552 from older adult-related subreddits and 1476 from Alzheimer disease-related subreddits; 18 key topics were identified, with the most frequent topics being expressing feelings (2178/3028, 71.93%) and seeking advice and support (1982/3028, 65.46%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Daily informal care time was 0.5 hours higher in moderate compared to mild and 1.3h higher in severe compared to mild cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 5,369 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Current Care and Support: Four themes emerged: Communication with empathy; Written information valuable but could be overwhelming; Referrals provided but not necessarily followed; A focus on prescribed anti-dementia medications. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 13 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Person-centered care provides a critical framework for dementia support in long-term care facilities, emphasizing attention to each resident's evolving needs, personal history, preferences, and values. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Half of the participants were over 70, with no formal education. 5 key findings →
Participants: 567 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Four clusters were identified: least disadvantaged (Class 1: 31.5% men; 30.6% women), most disadvantaged (Class 2: 20.2% men; 19.4% women), high social support with Class 1 features (Class 3: 22.2% men; 24.1% women), and high social support with Class 2 features (Class 4: 26.1% men; 25.7% women). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
According to the analysis of the GBD database in 2021, the deaths, DALYs, incidence, and prevalence of ADOD increased by 297.34 %, 249.54 %, 244.73 %, and 250.44 % in Asia from 1990 to 2021. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
T2DM is one of the strong risk factors of ADRD but genetic T2DM effect does not contribute to ADRD risk. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
From 356 participants, 104 were MCI-C, whereas 252 were MCI-NC. 5 key findings →
Participants: 356 Evidence: low
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 →