Ageing societies and a rising prevalence of dementia are associated with increasing demand for care home places. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
30,580 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The Framingham 10-risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) has been a widely studied estimate of cardiovascular risk in the general population. 4 key findings →
Participants: 179 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
TBI had the highest percentage (37%) compared to other conditions, which may be attributed to the prevalent challenge of cognitive impairment in TBI in addition to physical disability. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,285 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Receipt of potentially burdensome hospitalizations and treatments; receipt of postdischarge home and facility care. 5 key findings →
Participants: 659 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A comprehensive outcome monitoring system to monitor the quality and safety of care and variation for HCP recipients was developed. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 68 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The implementation of needs assessments was associated with increased long-term care (LTC) service utilization. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
48/100
length of stay, need for a higher level of care, and mortality after discharge in patients with and without delirium. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 33 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundOdor identification deficits predict Alzheimer's disease (AD) in epidemiological studies. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 600 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 266 older adults with hypertension were surveyed in this study, of whom 108 reported having fallen once or more in the past year. 5 key findings →
Participants: 266 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
To the Editor: The standardized management of pain–agitation–delirium (PAD) represents a fundamental component of clinical practice in intensive care units (ICUs).[1] Evidence-based analgesia and sedation strategies not only alleviate patients’ physiological discomfort and psychological distress, but also significantly reduce mechanical ventilation duration, improve long-term prognosis, and optimize healthcare resource allocation.[1,2] Equally crucial is delirium management, as evidenced by studies demonstrating that delirium duration independently predicts mortality risk, hospital stay length, healthcare expenditures, and acquired dementia incidence.[3] Although existing studies have explored PAD management practices, most rely on clinicians’ subjective recall that may distort objective clinical realities and fail to reflect distinctive characteristics.[4] Therefore, this nationwide multicenter cross-sectional study, initiated by the Critical Care Analgesia and Sedation Quality Control Subspecialty Group under the China National Center for Medical Quality Control in Critical Care Medicine, aims to investigate the current status of PAD management in China. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,627 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Sepsis is a major cause of death in intensive care units worldwide. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous studies have indicated a prevalence of dementia in older admissions of ∼42% in a single London teaching hospital, and 21% in four Queensland hospitals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Up to 7 August 2020, there were 29,542 (95% CI 25,176 to 33,908) excess deaths in all care homes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 145 342 adults met inclusion criteria; 10.5% had ADRD and were likely to be older, female, and have more comorbid conditions. 4 key findings →
Participants: 342 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The most important predictors of having a diagnosis of ADRD by the start of care OASIS assessment were a prior discharge diagnosis of ADRD among those admitted from an inpatient setting, and frequently exhibiting symptoms of confusion. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Individuals living with dementia often have limited capacity to express their care preferences at the final stage of life, and therefore, are at risk of receiving end-of-life care that may not align with their preferences.1 While most people prefer to be at home in their final days of life,2 research has shown that individuals with dementia are less likely to die in a home or community setting compared to those without dementia.3, 4 Studies also suggest that the percentage of individuals with dementia who died in a home or community setting has been increasing over time.5, 6 This study sought to update the literature by examining the association between dementia status and site of death, and by comparing the trends in site of death between decedents with and without dementia using recent national data. 5 key findings →
Participants: 813,213 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 1309 new patients, 514 (39% of new patients) had clinical mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,309 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The analysis tools and statistical methods used in large neuroimaging research studies differ from those applied in clinical contexts, making it unclear whether these techniques can be translated to a memory clinic setting. 5 key findings →
Participants: 213 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Fifty-three experts participated (eight completed all rounds). 5 key findings →
Participants: 32 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 120 people with delirium participated [median age 86.3, range 70-99, 67 (55.8%) female and 55 (45.8%) with dementia]. 5 key findings →
Participants: 120 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 327 patients were included in this study. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 327 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In a sample of 2,599 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age 78.4 years, 52.9% female, 81.8% White), we identified a total of 5,677 hospitalization claims. 5 key findings →
Participants: 5,677 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
388,899 deaths were included. Most people died in care homes (55.3%) or hospitals (39.6%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 115,757 NH residents with dementia who self-reported pain in the last 30 days of life. 5 key findings →
Participants: 20,585 Evidence: low
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.
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 30,580 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 30,580 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (64.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.6%), 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.
1,037 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 964 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 →
Newest studies, as a dated timeline → Atom feed Where this research is being discussed: events