Home › Research › What the research found › Every row
Every row of the evidence table
One row per finding: what was tested, which way the result went, and how the study was built. The answer by area, and where the studies disagree, are on the main page.
Every row
Filter
Showing 6 of 382 rows. One row per study per exposure: a study that tested two different things appears twice, once for each.
Scroll the table sideways to see every column.
| Exposure | Question | Direction | Outcome measured | Design | People | Effect size, as the source reported it | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amyloid and tau PET (appropriate use criteria) Care, carers and services | Treatment |
No direction reported
whyAppropriate use criteria rated by consensus: for amyloid PET seven of 17 scenarios were rated appropriate, two uncertain and eight rarely appropriate; for tau PET five, six and six. No effect estimate is reported. |
None measured (appropriate use criteria) | systematic review | not stated | not established — consensus criteria; the abstract reports scenario ratings, not an effect estimate. |
Alzheimer's & Dementia
2025 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 39776249 |
| Blood biomarker test (p-tau217 / amyloid ratio) Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Mixed
whyThe review's own summary points two ways: CSF biomarker tests were mostly cost-effective against cognitive assessment or imaging, while blood biomarker tests showed mixed results; every included study was model-based. |
Cost-effectiveness of CSF and blood biomarker testing for AD diagnosis across nine model-based economic evaluations | systematic review | not stated | not established — systematic review without meta-analysis; the abstract reports no pooled estimate. |
European Journal of Health Economics
2026 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 41385058 |
| Blood biomarker test (p-tau217 / amyloid ratio) Care, carers and services | Treatment |
No direction reported
whyA clinical practice guideline. It sets performance thresholds for blood tests (at least 90% sensitivity and 75% specificity for triage; at least 90% for both to substitute for amyloid PET or CSF) and reports no effect estimate of its own. |
None measured (clinical practice guideline) | systematic review | not stated | not established — guideline; recommendations rather than an effect estimate. |
Alzheimer's & Dementia
2025 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 40729527 |
| Cost-effectiveness of anti-amyloid antibody Care, carers and services | Treatment |
Mixed
whyThe review splits by drug class: at $100,000 per QALY every study found memantine cost-effective and more than half found the cholinesterase inhibitors so, whereas aducanumab, lecanemab and donanemab were not cost-effective in any study. A value result, not a clinical harm. |
Cost-effectiveness of FDA-approved AD drugs across 23 published analyses (memantine, cholinesterase inhibitors, anti-amyloid antibodies) | systematic review | not stated | At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000/QALY, all studies found memantine cost-effective, and more than half reported cost-effectiveness for donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine. Aducanumab, lecanemab, and donanemab were not cost-effective in any study. Under the WTP threshold of $150,000/QALY, value-based prices for aducanumab, lecanemab, and donanemab were estimated below $5,960, $15,700, and $33,700, respectively |
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
2026 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 41837605 |
| Diagnostic evaluation and disclosure guideline Care, carers and services | Treatment |
No direction reported
whyA clinical practice guideline. It sets out a structured, patient-centred process for evaluating, diagnosing and disclosing suspected Alzheimer's disease or related dementias in any practice setting, and reports no effect estimate. |
None measured (clinical practice guideline for primary care) | systematic review | not stated | not established — guideline; the abstract reports no effect estimate. |
Alzheimer's & Dementia
2024 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 39713942 |
| Respite care Care, carers and services | Treatment |
No effect
whyThree trials comparing respite with no respite found no significant benefit on any carer outcome; the four included trials were too different to pool. |
Carer burden and institutionalisation | systematic review | 753 | No significant benefit found on any caregiver outcome |
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
2014 ✓ Peer-reviewed PMID 24435941 |