In the past decade a large body of evidence has accumulated on risk factors for dementia, primarily from Europe and North America. 1 key finding →
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.
The identification of genetic forms of Parkinson's disease (PD) has tremendously expanded our understanding of the players and mechanisms involved. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The prevalence of dementia has substantially increased worldwide. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
As patients lose cognitive function, they lose autonomy and increasingly use fiscal, social, and medical resources. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
39/100
The societal value of strategies that delay the onset and progression of dementia cannot be overstated. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Engaging in targeted exercise interventions is a promising, non-pharmacological strategy to mitigate the deleterious effects of aging and disease on brain health. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The incidence of dementia is expected to double in the next 20 years and will contribute to heavy social and economic burden. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Physical activity and exercise have become a central component of medical management of chronic illness, particular for the elderly who suffer from neurodegenerative disorders that impair their cognition and mobility. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In recent years, electroencephalography (EEG) has emerged as a low-cost, accessible and objective tools for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A significant body of evidence supports the protective role of exercise training (ET) in cardiovascular diseases, skeletal muscle dystrophies, several types of cancer, Alzheimer disease or even in the recovery of spinal cord injury. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The number of adults with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or related dementia is expected to increase exponentially. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
39/100
Present demographic changes demonstrate that the number of elderly people is growing at a frenetic pace. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The differentiation of subtypes of primary progressive aphasia (PPA) remains challenging. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Frailty syndrome encompasses several physical hallmarks such as loss of muscle strength, power output and mass, which leads to poor gait ability, fatigue, falls and overall difficulty to perform activities of daily living. 1 key finding →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementias, and Alzheimer's disease (AD) in particular, will increasingly become a public health issue. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is increasing in Australia in line with population ageing and is expected to peak by mid-century. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Increased age is associated with normative declines in both sleep and cognitive functioning. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
39/100
Lemborexant (DAYVIGO™) is an orally administered, dual orexin receptor (OXR) antagonist that exhibits reversible competitive antagonism at OXR1 and OXR2 (> affinity at OXR2) that was discovered and developed by Eisai Inc. for the treatment of adult patients with insomnia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
39/100
Insomnia is associated with socioeconomic status, racial and ethnic classification, family relationships, medical and mental health disorders, cognitive function, and dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The endogenous circadian rhythms are one of the cardinal processes that control sleep. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Insomnia is a common problem in older people, especially in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) whose circadian rhythm is often compromised. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Disruptions of sleep and circadian rhythms are among the most debilitating symptoms in patients with neurodegenerative diseases. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sleep problems occur commonly in normal and pathologic aging. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The number of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is increasing significantly. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Insomnia is a common sleep disorder among older adults, and a risk factor for poor physical and mental health. 2 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 →