In fact, average benefits are considered modest compared with the benefits of other developed countries. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This includes adapting and disseminating care delivery innovations from one system to another, as well as measuring and sharing in the improved outcomes and reduced costs that might result. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (Alzheimer's), an ultimately fatal form of dementia, is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States, accounting for 3.6% of all deaths in 2014 (1,2). 3 key findings →
Participants: 93,541 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
KEY POINTSO_LIThis paper demonstrates the feasibility of implementing Geriatric ED programs with targeted support for people living with or at risk for dementia across three distinct health systems in San Francisco. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
16/100
BackgroundThe 10 Year Health Plan for England indicates governmental intention to shift care from hospital to community. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
It remains unclear whether the combined conditions confer an excess risk of hypoglycaemia-related hospitalisation beyond the risks associated with either condition alone. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 329,566 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We study the design of optimal (private and/or social) insurance schemes for formal home care and institutional care. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Marginal utility of financial resources when needing long-term care, and the related incentives for precautionary savings and insurance, may vary significantly by whether one receives care at home or in a nursing home. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
16/100
In Phase 1 (n =176), inpatients with delirium showed higher concentrations of both NfL and GFAP than patients with dementia (β = 0.78; 95% CI [0.37, 1.20] and β = 0.39 [0.07, 0.73] respectively) or PPD groups (β = 1.17; [0.69, 1.66] and β = 0.83 [0.51, 1.24] respectively). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 176 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The study evaluated 1,457 PD patients (1,050 primary; 407 secondary) alongside 2,100 matched non-PD controls. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results showed that caregiving burden was negatively associated with the sense of ability.. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 355 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The prognostic significance of psychosis in dementia differs by symptom profile. 4 key findings →
Participants: 21,108 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
16/100
More than one-quarter of residents with ADRD remain untreated with guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy, and treatment varied significantly by non-clinical predictors. 5 key findings →
Participants: 359,801 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Oral health is a key component of quality of life among older adults, yet maintaining preventive dental care becomes increasingly difficult for those with long-term care (LTC) needs. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,055 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, 81.7% of residents diagnosed with depression had ≥1 pharmacological depression treatment order. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Contexts and mechanisms associated with attendees’ and caregivers’ social determinants of health, and system-level contexts and mechanisms that influence ADPs are important knowledge gaps to be addressed by studies and to be incorporated in our program theory in the future. 3 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
16/100
Strengths and limitations of this study This study evaluates a digitally enabled remote monitoring model for people living with dementia that integrates passive in-home sensors and algorithm-derived digital biomarkers to detect clinically relevant changes such as infection risk, behavioural disturbance and physiological deterioration. 5 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Sociodemographic and clinical variables routinely recorded in PC EHRs may contribute to dementia identification. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Implementation of an EHR-enabled AD care pathway was associated with improved adoption of guideline-concordant cognitive assessment and recommended diagnostic evaluation in primary care across three health systems. 5 key findings →
Participants: 10,206 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We used the September 2013 age-based rollout of the live-attenuated shingles vaccine in England as a natural experiment to estimate the effect of vaccine eligibility on shingles and dementia diagnoses in linked hospital records. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Functional–behavioral subtypes can be identified in hospitalized AD patients, supporting multidimensional risk stratification and individualized care planning. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 118 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Interventions that reduce functional capacity — antipsychotics or benzodiazepines for agitation, activity restriction for fall prevention, prolonged bed rest, incontinence product use, and catheterization — remain common in nursing homes even though functional decline is measured, publicly reported, and built into Five-Star ratings. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Thorough and structured assessment is essential for identifying unmet needs and managing distress in people with dementia in acute hospitals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Nurses showed moderate knowledge and positive attitudes, with knowledge closely linked to attitudes. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 11,377 AD hospitalizations, 600 in-hospital deaths occurred (5.27%). 5 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 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 →