28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
In this randomized trial of dementia care programs, no significant differences existed between health system-based and community-based care interventions nor between either active intervention or usual care regarding patient behavioral symptoms and caregiver strain. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 2,176 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Community occupational therapy intervention for patients with dementia and their care givers is successful and cost effective, especially in terms of informal care giving. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 135 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most care staff for long-term care residents with dementia experience low or moderate burnout levels. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 598 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This randomized trial of 406 spouse caregivers of people with Alzheimer's tested whether counseling and support (six counseling sessions, mandatory support groups, and on-call phone counseling) could delay nursing home placement. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 406 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Home based support for caregivers of persons with dementia, which emphasizes the use of locally available, low-cost human resources, is feasible, acceptable and leads to significant improvements in caregiver mental health and burden of caring. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Two thirds (66%) of adult child caregivers in the control condition admitted their parent to a residential care setting compared with 37% in the treatment condition. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Existing studies have included a narrow range of infectious diseases, relied on short follow-up periods, and provided little evidence for whether the increased risk is limited to specific dementia subtypes or attributable to specific microbes rather than infection burden. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 490 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No statistical difference was found in the efficacy of citalopram and risperidone for the treatment of either agitation or psychotic symptoms in patients with dementia. 5 key findings →
Participants: 103 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Median survival was much lower than in screened populations. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We recommend focusing on cognitive enhancement strategies, assessment and management of BPSD, and carer education and support to delay nursing home placement. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Patients were divided into a development (n = 3859) and validation (n = 1929) cohort. 2 key findings →
Participants: 3,859 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Beneficiaries with dementia who had lower levels of continuity of care were younger, had a higher income, and had more comorbid medical conditions. 3 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Study objective Delirium's adverse effect on long-term mortality in older hospitalized patients is well documented, whereas its effect in older emergency department (ED) patients remains unclear. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 628 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Much can still be done in the way of service development and provision, GP training and education, and the eradication of stigma attached to dementia, to improve the early detection and management of dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Such complex needs require an integrated response from general health professionals and multidisciplinary dementia specialists. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 291,169 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 395 persons with dementia were included. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Residents' QoL was negatively associated with advanced dementia, PDU, and NPS. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 207 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Caregivers who institutionalized their relative reported depressive symptoms and anxiety to be as high as they were while in-home caregivers. 4 key findings →
Participants: 180 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Caregivers' reasons for placement included (a) the need for more skilled care (65%); (b) the caregivers' health (49%); (c) the patients' dementia-related behaviors (46%); and (d) the need for more assistance (23%). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Although ACP programs in nursing homes may increase DNR directives, evidence of other EoL outcomes remains limited and inconsistent. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Primary care is the ideal setting for early detection of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD), as it serves as the primary point of care for most older adults. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among the 13 604 086 traditional Medicare beneficiaries included in the study (mean [SD] age, 79.4 [7.7] years; 60.4% women), 27.7% had a diagnosis of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
By 12 months after discharge, of those discharged with new or additional ADL disability, 41.3% died, 28.6% were alive but had not recovered to baseline function, and 30.1% were at baseline function. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Older people with cognitive impairment have a higher risk of a variety of negative outcomes in hospital. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Thirty-three studies were included. Over half were conducted in Western countries (n =20). 5 key findings →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
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.
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.
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 →