27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The treatment group had no EM after intervention completion (assessed at 3-month follow-up), a significantly lower rate than the control group (treatment = 0%, control = 23.1%, p = 0.010). 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 80 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Baseline assessments were conducted on 133 family caregivers of veterans living with dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 67 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The enrollment rate was acceptable despite pandemic related challenges (53/60 target recruitment sample). 5 key findings →
Participants: 53 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
Caregivers often prioritize the needs of the care recipient and neglect their own health needs. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 243 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Physicians have a responsibility to recognize caregiver burden. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among community-dwelling patients with moderate to severe dementia and their caregivers, dementia palliative care, compared with usual care, did not significantly improve patients' neuropsychiatric symptoms through 24 months. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 201 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The 780 PWDs (56.3% female; mean [SD] age, 78.1 [9.9] years) and 780 caregivers (70.9% female; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [12.0] years) lived in California (n = 452), Nebraska (n = 284), or Iowa (n = 44). 2 key findings →
Participants: 452 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall number of participants enrolled was 192, with a mean (standard deviation) amyloid PET load at baseline of 101.80 (29.80) centiloids. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Participants: 149 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Thirty-six resident videos were shared with family (N = 50) and staff (N = 38) during care plan meetings. 5 key findings →
Participants: 50 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Knowledge of CPR, MV, TF, and self-efficacy to make EOL treatment decisions increased significantly more in the ACT-Plan group at weeks 4 and 20. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 173 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Enabling characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity, caregiver education and employment and PWD education) and most predisposing characteristics (e.g., caregiver age, PWD age, relationship type) were not associated with any caregiving experience measures. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The intervention group showed improvement on several measures of wellbeing including Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire and Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Twenty-three studies from 12 countries were included (8 cluster RCTs, 9 individual RCTs, 6 non-randomized trials). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
FCC facilitates a palliative approach to care. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial 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
A program of counseling and support can substantially increase the time spouse-caregivers are able to care for AD patients at home, particularly during the early to middle stages of dementia when nursing home placement is generally least appropriate. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Greater access to effective programs of counseling and support could yield considerable benefits for caregivers, patients with Alzheimer disease, and society. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Current evidence on sex and gender differences in caregiving burden, mental and physical health is limited. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 22 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Between Feb 24, 2021, and March 5, 2023, 377 dyads were randomly assigned (1:1), 189 to usual treatment and 188 to intervention. 2 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 377 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among community-living dyads, a nonpharmacologic biobehavioral environmental intervention compared with control resulted in better outcomes for COPE dyads at 4 months. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Subjective caregiver burden is a significant risk factor for depressive symptoms in carers of older people and may precipitate clinical depression. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 56 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
15 care sites with 289 residents were randomly assigned. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is a need for more high-quality outcome studies, particularly using randomized designs to control for confounding. 2 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 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.
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 →