27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Between April 30, 2020, and May 9, 2022, we randomly allocated 204 participants (109 [53%] women and 95 [47%] men) to the intervention group and 98 (60 [61%] women and 38 [39%] men) to the control group. 218 (72%) participants at 6 months and 178 (59%) at 12 months provided cost data. 2 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 302 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The combined interventions produced a significant improvement of 0.14 to 0.41 standard deviation units, on average, for caregiver burden, depression, subjective well-being, perceived caregiver satisfaction, ability/knowledge, and care receiver symptoms. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Recommendations for practice include development of standardized guidelines that address caregiver assessment, education, and resources; identification of "caregiver champions" in practice settings; provision of referrals to established support organizations for caregivers (eg, Cancer Support Community, Cancer Care); and collaboration among caregiving, professional, and cancer-related organizations to advocate policy and practice changes for family caregivers. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This meta-review supports the conclusion that being a caregiver for people with dementia is associated with psychological stress and physical ill-health. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Purpose of the study During aging, musical activities can help maintain physical and mental health and cognitive abilities, but their rehabilitative use has not been systematically explored in persons with dementia (PWDs). 1 key finding →
Participants: 30 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Eighty-one studies with 3347 participants were included in this review. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,347 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The caregiver burden is frequently used to refer to the physical and psychological problems that may arise from caring for a dependent relative. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Adult children receiving the NYUCI-AC completed a mean of 5.19 individual and family counseling sessions; it took on average a little over 11 months to do so. 5 key findings →
Participants: 54 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A randomized, controlled trial. 1 key finding →
Participants: 17 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Thirty-five studies were analyzed with data from 3268 caregivers (pooled mean age [SD of sample means], 63.48 [5.99] years; 76.7% female) were analyzed. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Internet course 'Mastery over Dementia' offers an effective treatment for family caregivers of people with dementia reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety. 4 key findings →
Participants: 149 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
End-of-life care for patients with dementia was extremely demanding of family caregivers. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There is little evidence that interventions aimed at supporting and/or providing information to carers of people with dementia are uniformly effective. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Due to valued informal care, costs of care for community-living patients with moderate dementia are significantly higher than for patients with mild dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This prospective study followed 392 older spousal caregivers and 427 non-caregivers for an average of 4.5 years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 819 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer disease (AD) has a significant impact on caregivers. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,059 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Providing care for a frail older adult has been described as a stressful experience that may erode psychological well-being and physical health of caregivers. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
NPTs emerge as a useful, versatile and potentially cost-effective approach to improve outcomes and QoL in ADRD for both the PWD and CG. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Purpose of study The authors determined short-term effects of a home environmental intervention on self-efficacy and upset in caregivers and daily function of dementia patients. 1 key finding →
Participants: 171 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
High levels of caregiver burden are present in a large proportion of caregivers of people with dementia and this increases over time for those without services. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 720 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Family carers' perceptions of BPSD as challenging are associated with a sense of a declining relationship, transgressions against social norms and underlying beliefs that people with dementia inevitably lose their 'personhood'. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The facilitated approach explored in this study addressed known barriers to case conferencing. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Counseling and support lead to sustained benefits in reducing depressive symptoms in spouse-caregivers of Alzheimer's disease patients and should be widely available to provide effective, evidence-based intervention for family caregivers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This Cochrane systematic review looked for solid evidence that respite care (temporary relief for caregivers) helps caregivers or people with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic-review Participants: 753 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study underscores the substantial prevalence of loneliness and social isolation among informal carers of individuals with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 11,134 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
9 of the 893 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.
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →