Aging is associated with cognitive decline, yet this does not prevent older adults from finding ways to compensate for age-related deficits. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
40/100
White matter deterioration in the aging human brain contributes to cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The worldwide burden of dementia is immense, and set to increase to unprecedented levels in the coming decades, due to population aging. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Early detection of age-related cognitive decline has transformative potential to advance the scientific understanding of cognitive impairments and possible treatments by identifying relevant participants for clinical trials. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
At least 40% of all dementia has been linked to modifiable risk factors suggesting a clear potential for preventative approaches targeting these factors. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive training is a promising tool for slowing or preventing cognitive decline in older adults at-risk for dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Women are more prone than men to develop age-related dementia, such as Alzheimer's disease (AD). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, individuals participating in training regimens differ greatly with respect to their outcomes, demonstrating the importance of considering individual differences, in particular age and baseline performance in a cognitive domain, when evaluating the effectiveness of cognitive training. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The occurrence of different and opposed response patterns after the same training indicates a risk in applying classical group statistics. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study shows that multistrategic memory training with the metamemory concept may improve memory ability and other cognitive functions which are not trained and that these improvements may be achieved by pure cognitive training effects. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dysphagia is a prevalent difficulty among aging adults. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Elevated plasma lipopolysaccharide (LPS), an indicator of microbial translocation from the gut, is a likely cause of systemic immune activation in chronic HIV infection. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Medications with anticholinergic activity negatively affect the cognitive performance of older adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
40/100
From a series of 460 dementia patients referred to a regional brain bank, 14 (3%) patients had a pathologic diagnosis of primary degeneration of the brain involving multiple sites (frontoparietal cortex, striatum, medial thalamus, substantia nigra, and hypoglossal nucleus), with cell loss and astrocytosis. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pfeiffer's Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) is a brief screening test for organic brain syndromes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The observed trunk adaptations were a consistent instability factor. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The most common genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a GGGGCC repeat expansion in the C9orf72 gene. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Causal treatments for neurodegenerative diseases are now being developed and tested, and thus a molecular diagnosis is desirable. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
40/100
In view of its ability to explain the most frequent motor symptoms of Parkinson's Disease (PD), degeneration of dopaminergic neurons has been considered one of the disease's main pathophysiological features. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A lighting intervention, tailored to increase daytime circadian stimulation, can be used to increase sleep quality and improve behavior in patients with ADRD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Methylation is a post-translational modification that can affect numerous features of proteins, notably cellular localization, turnover, activity, and molecular interactions. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium in nondemented femoral neck fracture patients is associated with the development of dementia and a higher mortality rate. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
40/100
The Niemann-Pick disease group is now divided into two distinct entities: (1) acid sphingomyelinase-deficient Niemann-Pick disease (ASM-deficient NPD) resulting from mutations in the SMPD1 gene and encompassing type A and type B as well as intermediate forms; (2) Niemann-Pick disease type C (NP-C) including also type D, resulting from mutations in either the NPC1 or the NPC2 gene. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
At least nine recent population-based studies of dementia incidence or prevalence have shown a declining age-specific risk in the US, England, The Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Compared with France, where the percentage of the elderly population has increased just twofold in the past 100 years, Japanese society is aging at an unprecedented rate. 3 key findings →
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →