alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Research

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 301–325 of 979 studies · tagged Care Services (page 13 of 40) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Factors associated with the place of death of persons with advanced dementia: A systematic review of international literature with meta-analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Palliative medicine 2024-08-02

Many individuals with advanced dementia die in hospital, despite preferring home death. 1 key finding →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Clinical performance and head-to-head comparison of CSF p-tau235 with p-tau181, p-tau217 and p-tau231 in two memory clinic cohorts

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2023-03-10

High CSF p-tau235 levels were strongly associated with CSF amyloidosis regardless of the clinical diagnosis, being significantly increased in MCI Aβ+ and dementia Aβ+ when compared with all other Aβ- groups (Paris cohort: P ˂0.0001 for all; BIODEGMAR cohort: P ˂0.05 for all). 5 key findings →

Participants: 212 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Developments in the Market for Assisted Living: Residential Care Availability in 2017

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 2020-09-29

In comparison to counties with the lowest AL penetration, high-penetration counties had higher high school and college education attainment (mean 25.3% vs 18.5%) and median annual income ($56,000 vs $46,800), and lower poverty (12.8% vs 17.3%) and unemployment rates (3.9% vs 5.1%). 5 key findings →

Participants: 1,000 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Performance of plasma p-tau217 for the detection of amyloid-β positivity in a memory clinic cohort using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2024-08-19

Of 108 participants (age: 69 ± 6.5 years; 54.6% female) with paired samples obtained at time of LP, 64.8% (n = 70/108) had Aβ pathology detected (35 with Mild Cognitive Impairment and 35 with mild dementia). 2 key findings →

Participants: 70 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Procedural Framework to Facilitate Hospital-Based Informed Consent for Dementia Research

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2018-09-24

Improving quality and delivery of care for people with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) requires a comprehensive research agenda that encompasses the entire care continuum. 5 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Decisions to forgo hospitalization in advanced dementia: a nationwide study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2007-03-01

Directives to forgo hospitalization for U.S. NH residents with advanced dementia are uncommon and are associated with the organizational features of the facilities caring for them and the intensity of end-of-life care practiced in the region, as well as individual resident characteristics. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 91,521 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Treatment of nursing home residents with dementia and lower respiratory tract infection in the United States and The Netherlands: an ocean apart

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2004-05-01

Care for U.S. nursing home residents with LRI and dementia is more aggressive than care for Dutch residents, particularly in residents with severe dementia. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 36 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Dying with dementia in Medicare Advantage, Accountable Care Organizations, or traditional Medicare

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2021-05-14

Among 370,094 persons with dementia, 93,801 (25.4%) were in MA (mean age [SD], 86.9 [7.7], 67.6% female), 39,586 (10.7%) were ACO attributed (mean age [SD], 87.2 [7.6], 67.3% female), and 236,707 (63.9%) were in TM (mean age [SD], 87.0 [7.8], 67.6% female). 5 key findings →

Participants: 370,094 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of five cross-cultural cognitive screening instruments for dementia and mild cognitive impairment in a multicultural memory clinic sample

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer s Disease 2025-06-22

BackgroundWith the changing demographic landscape in most countries worldwide, early identification of cognitive impairment in multicultural populations is increasingly relevant. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 187 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Home Health Quality among Hospitalized Older Adults with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia: Association with Race/Ethnicity and Dual Eligibility before and during the COVID Pandemic

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 2024-06-07

During the COVID-19 pandemic, home health agencies (HHAs) discharges following acute hospitalizations increased. 1 key finding →

Design: cohort study Participants: 426,766 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Feasibility and reliability of four pain self-assessment scales and correlation with an observational rating scale in hospitalized elderly demented patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences 2005-04-01

Self-assessment pain scales can be used reliably in the vast majority of older hospitalized patients with mild to moderate dementia and in nearly half of those with severe dementia. 2 key findings →

Participants: 160 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Nursing home manager's knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about advance care planning for people with dementia in long-term care settings: a cross-sectional survey

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of clinical nursing 2017-02-09

Whilst nursing home managers recognise the potential benefits of advance care planning, barriers and challenges create a reluctance to facilitate. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 178 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Advance care planning for older people in Australia presenting to the emergency department from the community or residential aged care facilities

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Health & social care in the community 2014-12-02

The purpose of this retrospective, cross-sectional study was to determine the prevalence of advance care planning (ACP) among older people presenting to an Emergency Department (ED) from the community or a residential aged care facility. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 40 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Drug utilization in Belgian nursing homes: impact of residents' and institutional characteristics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety 2010-10-01

A high level of drug utilization, influenced by the characteristics of residents and the institution, was observed in Belgian nursing homes. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,510 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Palliative care for advanced dementia: Knowledge and attitudes of long-term care staff

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of clinical nursing 2017-12-13

This study indicates the need to provide nurses and nursing assistants with more information about palliative care practice for people with advanced dementia. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 125 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

The cerebrospinal fluid biomarker ratio Aβ42/40 identifies amyloid positron emission tomography positivity better than Aβ42 alone in a heterogeneous memory clinic cohort

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Alzheimer's research & therapy 2022-04-26

CSF Aβ42/40 ratio can predict PET amyloid positivity with high accuracy in patients with a range of cognitive disorders when evaluating Aβ pathology independent of tau and neurodegeneration for research purposes. 4 key findings →

Participants: 44 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Attributable risk of hospital admissions for overall and specific mental disorders due to particulate matter pollution: A time-series study in Chengdu, China

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Environmental research 2018-12-12

The associations of particulate matter (PM) pollution with the morbidity of overall and subtypes of mental disorders (MDs), as well as the corresponding morbidity burden, remain understudied, especially in developing countries. 5 key findings →

Participants: 10,947 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

From across this tag

9 of the 973 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 9. The same 9 appear here every time.

↑ Change the filters

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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.

1,032 records (3.8% 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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed