Key Messages: Our results suggest that benzodiazepine use is significantly associated with dementia risk. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Adverse effects offset advantages in the efficacy of atypical antipsychotic drugs for the treatment of psychosis, aggression, or agitation in patients with Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A simple exercise program, 1 hour twice a week, led to significantly slower decline in ADL score in patients with AD living in a nursing home than routine medical care. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These results confirm the efficacy and safety of tacrine in some patients with Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Adults who engage in leisure time aerobic and muscle strengthening activities at levels recommended by the 2018 physical activity guidelines for Americans show greatly reduced risk of all cause and cause specific mortality. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 268 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
During the aging process, physical capabilities (e.g., muscular strength) and cognitive functions (e.g., memory) gradually decrease. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The association of physical activity with dementia and its subtypes has remained controversial in the literature and has continued to be a subject of debate among researchers. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Low physical activity is associated with a higher risk for dementia in older individuals, suggesting that a reduced risk of dementia and higher brain volumes may be additional health benefits of maintaining physical activity into old age. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 3,714 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Baseline EDS was associated with increased longitudinal Aβ accumulation in elderly persons without dementia, suggesting that those with EDS may be more vulnerable to pathologic changes associated with Alzheimer disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 283 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Screening for IC impairments identifies older adults at higher risk of incident frailty and incident IADL/ADL disability. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 759 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Healthy life expectancy (HALE) was used to summarize overall population health, accounting for both length of life and levels of ill health experienced at different ages. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Several studies with animal research associate air pollution in Alzheimer's disease (AD) neuropathology, but the actual impact of air pollution on the risk of AD is unknown. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 95,690 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
An emerging body of evidence has raised concern regarding the potentially harmful effects of inhaled pollutants on the central nervous system during the last decade. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this cohort study, higher residential PM2.5 levels, especially from agriculture and wildfires, were associated with higher rates of incident dementia, providing further evidence supporting PM2.5 reduction as a population-based approach to promote healthy cognitive aging. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 27 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on 19 studies the weighted RR for occupational exposure to EMFs was 1.26 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07⁻1.50) for ALS, 1.33 (95% CI 1.07⁻1.64) for Alzheimer's disease and 1.02 (95% CI 0.83⁻1.26) for Parkinson's disease. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found no evidence that exposure to road traffic noise, either independently or in combination with traffic air pollution, was associated with risk of dementia in our study area. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,721 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
69/100
This population-based cohort study demonstrates significant association between IBD and subsequent development of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,742 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive frailty, defined as the coexistence of mild cognitive impairment symptoms and physical frailty phenotype in older persons, is increasingly considered the main geriatric condition predisposing to dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
69/100
Serum IgG levels to common periodontal microbiota are associated with risk for developing incident AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 219 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In 46 634 participants (51.7% female; mean [SD] age at death, 82.4 [9.0] years), SBPs and DBPs peaked 18 to 14 years before death and then decreased progressively. 2 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 634 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Evidence suggests that people living with cognitive impairment value opportunities to be involved in everyday decision-making about their care. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Epidemiological evidence reveals that patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have an increased risk of neurodegenerative diseases (NDs), including dementia and Parkinson's disease (PD). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 4,651 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results encourage an independent validation cohort study to confirm the indication that the plasma Aβ 1-40 /Aβ 1-42 ratio, assessed via Simoa, may improve future standard of care and clinical trial design. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 276 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Promising results are reported across nearly all 51 studies, but very few have been implemented in clinical research or practice. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
69/100
The prevalence and incidence of early-onset dementia among adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is currently unknown. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 12,648 Evidence: moderate
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →