Age was similar between groups (p = 0.07). 5 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Higher per-capita food availability was positively associated with dementia outcomes in minimally adjusted models, particularly for the 2005 exposure window, although these associations were substantially attenuated after full covariate adjustment. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
It is well recognized that the number of older adults who suffer from dementia has been increasing and will continue to do so over the coming years. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Hospital dementia care discourse on Reddit advanced 4 negative sentiment themes: (1) fear of poor medication management, hydration, and hygiene, (2) loss of patient advocacy, (3) precipitation of advance directive discussions, and (4) delayed discharge and loss of nursing home bed. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between 1980 and 1987, the number of hospital discharges with total hip replacement (THR) increased by more than 90%, while total hospital discharges fell by more than 10%. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The everyday landscape of occupational therapy (OT) in oncology is underexplored, hindering targeted improvements. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Based on physician medical records alone, the 231 high-risk participants (mean age 77, 67% women) received recommended care for 53% of 5,569 evaluated clinical circumstances, ranging from 12% for end-of-life care to 78% for diabetes mellitus. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The plans are all normalized such that 50% of the PTV receives 30 Gy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Compared to TM, MA increased the odds of annual wellness visits and reduced Hispanic-White disparity in annual wellness visits. 2 key findings →
Participants: 129,177 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found that COVID patients initially experienced substantially longer hospital stays (8.3 vs 4.6 days) and higher 30-day mortality (34% vs 5%) compared to patients without COVID. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In 18,383 CM patients PS-matched to 18,383 dialysis patients, unadjusted Cox models showed dialysis transition was associated with higher risk of dementia, MCI, or combined dementia/MCI vs. CM: HRs (95%CIs) 1.40 (1.32-1.48), 1.64 (1.46, 1.85), and 1.42 (1.34, 1.49). 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Through 2022, 5% of fee-for-service beneficiaries with dementia received CACP compared to 3% of MA beneficiaries (p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Being exposed to a peer who adopted CACP was a strong predictor of providers’ own uptake of CACP. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings highlight potential access and quality-of-care issues in PR, with implications for Medicare Advantage benchmarks. 4 key findings →
Participants: 4,965 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vascular dementia (VaD) is the second commonest subtype of dementia after Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Participants were 1060 Veterans (response rate of 20.14%), mean age of 68.39 (SD=8.52) years, 59.0% Caucasian, 69.2% non‐Hispanic, 95.8% male, 12.0% screened positive for MCI and 15.6% for dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
AD mortality rates significantly increased over time. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with waiver enrollees, PACE enrollees had 31% lower risk of long-term NH admission (p < .001). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Several existing systematic reviews have summarized the prevalence of dementia in mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
's < 0.05). The findings suggest that neighborhood-level social deprivation might influence memory and motor status, primarily through its impact on motor brain health. 1 key finding →
Participants: 22 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research on Area Deprivation Index (ADI) suggests that the built environment and neighborhood stressors (e.g., violent crime incidents) play a role in later-life cognitive function. 4 key findings →
Participants: 147 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patient satisfaction outcomes range from 71 - 100% with service intervention outcomes favourably indicating the direct impact of the service, which are unmeasurable to the older adult living with dementia, and include increases in: (i) Confidence - 90%; (ii) Mood - 50% and (iii) open to talking through difficulties encountered - 87%. 3 key findings →
Participants: 67,744 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants racialized as Black living in a county with a history of lynching, disproportionate police killings, and disproportionate jail and prison incarceration were 2.8 (95%CI [-0.003, 5.834]) times more likely to have at least one incident of cognitive impairment between 2008-2020 compared to participants racialized as Black living in a county with a history of lynching and disproportionate police killings but not disproportionate incarceration. 3 key findings →
Participants: 185 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared to those in rural areas, participants who resided in urban areas during young adulthood had lower late midlife ADI (β = -0.85, p < .05), and better executive function (β = 0.19), processing speed (β = 0.24), and verbal fluency (β = 0.30) (ps < .05) in older adulthood. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The current study provides opportunities for safer approaches that using compounds derived from plants and links it to nanotechnology, could be used in the pharmaceutical industry to treat Alzheimer’s disease. 2 key findings →
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 28,980 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 28,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (62.8% of the library) and OpenAlex (17.6%), 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.
1,038 records (3.6% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 966 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 →