When diagnosed, non-Hispanic Blacks and Hispanics may have more advanced dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,966 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We aimed to inform planning by assessing intrinsic capacity prevalence, by characterising the target group, and by validating the general approach-testing hypotheses that DIC was consistently associated with higher risks of incident dependence and death. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 17,031 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
67/100
Among 34 349 participants, 19 378 individuals who were free of stroke and dementia and had longitudinal BP, cognitive, and covariate data were included in the analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 349 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 2320 unique papers was found; the full text of 87 was reviewed. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 10,500 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Accumulating data suggest that cerebrovascular disease contributes to Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology and progression toward dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,722 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of the 7342 total sample, 4348 participants (60.3%) were women. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 7,342 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
67/100
In this exploratory analysis of a US community-based cohort, several echocardiographic measures of lower LA function were significantly associated with an increased risk of subsequent dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 4,096 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Head injury was associated with risk of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3-1.57), with evidence of dose-response (1 head injury: HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.13-1.39, 2+ head injuries: HR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.86-2.46). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 14,376 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
67/100
The evidence base for treating a range of nonmotor symptoms in PD has grown substantially in recent years. 2 key findings →
Participants: 37 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The prediction of dementia in AD by SMI with subsequent amnestic MCI supports the model of a consecutive 3-stage clinical manifestation of AD from SMI via MCI to dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,415 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
People who had recovered from COVID-19, including those no longer reporting symptoms, exhibited significant cognitive deficits versus controls when controlling for age, gender, education level, income, racial-ethnic group, pre-existing medical disorders, tiredness, depression and anxiety. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 192 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Traditional neuroimage analysis pipelines involve computationally intensive, time-consuming optimization steps, and thus, do not scale well to large cohort studies with thousands or tens of thousands of individuals. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The CSF AD profile was more common in patients with SCI (31 of 60 [52%]), naMCI (25 of 37 [68%]), and aMCI (56 of 71 [79%]) than in healthy controls (28 of 89 [31%]). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Nondemented individuals exhibit a slow rate of whole-brain atrophy from early in adulthood with white-matter loss beginning in middle age; in older adults, the onset of dementia of the Alzheimer type is associated with a markedly accelerated atrophy rate. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 192 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
High concentrations of Abeta(1-40) but not Abeta(1-42) at baseline were associated with an increased risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,713 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
During mean follow-up of 2.1 (range 1.5-3.4) years, 146 incident cases of dementia were detected, of which 105 were Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 6,870 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted after adjusting for age, sex, and educational status. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,969 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Over a median of 18 years, 1180 former soccer players (15.4%) and 3807 controls (16.5%) died. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The heterogeneity of neurodegenerative diseases is a key confound to disease understanding and treatment development, as study cohorts typically include multiple phenotypes on distinct disease trajectories. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Data collected from clinical trials and cohort studies, such as dementia studies, are often high-dimensional, censored, heterogeneous and contain missing information, presenting challenges to traditional statistical analysis. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,037 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite the promise of a multitude of sensors and devices that can be applied, there are no agreed-upon standards for digital biomarkers, nor are there comprehensive evidence-based results for which digital biomarkers may be demonstrated to be most effective. 3 key findings →
Participants: 279 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Main results We identified no studies which met the inclusion criteria. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium is the most common manifestation of brain dysfunction in critically ill patients. 5 key findings →
Participants: 25,000 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 6 952 440 vaccinated patients in the derivation cohort, 5 150 310 (74.1%) had two vaccine doses. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This large cohort of 85 year olds showed good levels of both self rated health and functional ability despite significant levels of disease and impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 853 Evidence: moderate
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 27,780 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 →