31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
As with incidences, HRs were higher in patients who had more severe COVID-19 (eg, those admitted to ITU compared with those who were not: 1·58, 1·50-1·67, for any diagnosis; 2·87, 2·45-3·35, for any first diagnosis). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 379 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
When identifying participants with abnormal CSF Aβ42/40 in the whole cohort, plasma IP-MS-WashU Aβ42/40 showed significantly higher accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.81-0.90) than LC-MS-Arc Aβ42/40, IA-Elc Aβ42/40, IA-EI Aβ42/40, and IA-N4PE Aβ42/40 (AUC range, 0.69-0.78; P Conclusions and relevance The results from 2 independent cohorts indicate that certain MS-based methods performed better than most of the immunoassays for plasma Aβ42/40 when detecting brain Aβ pathology. 2 key findings →
Participants: 182 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Aerobic exercise has shown inconsistent cognitive effects in older adults with Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 96 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Early specialist PC exposure reduced the risk of hospital-based acute care in the last 30 days of life for all chronic disease groups except dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 169 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Genetic discoveries of Alzheimer's disease are the drivers of our understanding, and together with polygenetic risk stratification can contribute towards planning of feasible and efficient preventive and curative clinical trials. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 409,435 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Previous genome-wide association studies have identified dozens of susceptibility loci for sporadic Alzheimer's disease, but few of these loci have been validated in longitudinal cohorts. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,913 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A distribution-based approach using data included in a systematic review approximated known MCIDs. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 12,449 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Intensive treatment was associated with a small but statistically significant greater decrease in hippocampal volume compared with standard treatment, consistent with the observation that intensive treatment is associated with greater decreases in total brain volume. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 1,267 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sleep dysregulation is a feature of dementia but it remains unclear whether sleep duration prior to old age is associated with dementia incidence. 4 key findings →
Participants: 7,959 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Increased cerebrospinal fluid neurofilament light (NfL) is a recognized biomarker for neurodegeneration that can also be assessed in blood. 1 key finding →
Participants: 805 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A combination of plasma phospho-tau (P-tau) and other accessible biomarkers might provide accurate prediction about the risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. 2 key findings →
Participants: 340 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
The search yielded 115 distinctly named non-genetic risk and protective factors with a significant association, with various strengths of evidence. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Measuring usability and UX in cognitive intervention technologies for older adults with MCI or dementia provides an integrated view that can contribute to their development according to the needs and characteristics of the target population. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings provide a current overview of published PC-interventions in dementia, which followed heterogeneous approaches under the PCC-concept. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, to replace existing nonpharmaceutical treatment training protocols, VR platforms need significant improvement if they are to appeal to older people with symptoms of cognitive decline and meet their specific needs. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This trial that enlist the support of private enterprises will lead to the creation of new services for dementia prevention as well as to verify the effectiveness of multi-domain interventions for dementia prevention. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Whether dietary and nutrition and dietary patterns are associated with the development of dementia is an interesting research question. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 340,000 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The optimal management of post-stroke cognitive impairment remains controversial. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Main results Eighteen studies were included. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
End-of-life care and research that focuses only on cognitive and functional decline may fail to recognise the complexities and unmet needs relevant to dementia and end of life. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Medicare beneficiaries with a diagnosis of dementia receiving postacute care in HH or SNF experienced similar rates of readmission and mortality across settings. 2 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 977,946 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It is currently unclear whether plasma biomarkers can be used as independent prognostic tools to predict changes associated with early Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 123 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We demonstrated that higher amyloid burden as measured by both CSF amyloid beta 42/40 ratio and non-displaceable binding potential in the posterior cingulate cortex was associated with lower functional connectivity in the default mode network. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 173 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our systematic review shows evidence for disruptions in (night-time) melatonin levels in AD as compared to age-matched controls. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.
1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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