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

28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 526–550 of 571 studies · free to read · tagged Digital Tools (page 22 of 23) · 28,180 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; 13,658 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.

Bridging the Digital Divide: Community-Engaged Strategies for Implementing Technology in Rural Adult Day Centers

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2025-12-01

Successfully embedding technology into long-term care settings requires intentional, evidence-based community engagement strategies that address the unique needs of providers, caregivers, and persons living with dementia. 1 key finding →

Participants: 17 Evidence: low

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

84 Effect of the 2020 CMS telehealth expansion on diagnostic prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science 2026-04-01

This reduction is likely a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have decreased overall diagnostic opportunities. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Multimodal Deep Learning for Dynamic and Static Neuroimaging: Integrating MRI and fMRI for Alzheimer Disease Analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Journal of Machine Learning for Modeling and Computing 2026-01-01

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) provides detailed structural information, while functional MRI (fMRI) captures temporal brain activity. 2 key findings →

Participants: 29 Evidence: low

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

Qualitative Evaluation of an Online Technology to Support Rural Caregivers of People with Dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Geriatrics 2025-12-05

Key barriers included limited digital literacy, resistance to technology and privacy concerns, as well as competing organisational priorities, and inadequate technological infrastructure. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Emerging Trends in Early Dementia Diagnosis: An Analysis on Advanced Machine Learning Approaches

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. ACM Computing Surveys 2025-08-28

Dementia is the waning of cognitive abilities, which is typically seen with the natural aging process and includes issues with memory, language, and problem-solving abilities. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Digital Health Literacy and Physical Activity Programme for Improvement of Quality of Life in Caregivers of People with Dementia (CAREFIT): Study Protocol

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Healthcare 2025-05-22

The proposed protocol for the CAREFIT programme represents an innovative and multidisciplinary initiative that leverages a digital platform to promote the well-being of informal caregivers of people with dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Performance on an Everyday Life Activity in Persons Diagnosed with Alcohol Dependency Compared to Healthy Controls: Relations between a Computerized Shopping Task and Cognitive and Clinical Variables†

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. Alcohol and Alcoholism 2012-02-20

Performance on the shopping task significantly differentiated patients and healthy controls for several variables and, in particular, for total time. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Leveraging Explainable AI for Dementia Classification: A Machine Learning Approach

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. International Journal of Applied Sciences & Development 2025-01-29

In last two decades the growing life expectancy has spiralled the prevalence of neurogenerative disorder such as Dementia among elderly population posing a significant challenge to mental health globally. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

TACDAR: Tetra Alzheimer Disease Classification via Dilated Coordinate Attention Based RegNet

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 2026-06-20

Alzheimer disease (AD) destroys brain cells and the patient’s memory is lost as a result of a progressive and incurable neurodegenerative disease. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Improving quality of life for institutionalized individuals with advanced dementia: A pilot study on efficacy of a semi-immersive virtual reality driving simulator for individuals with advanced dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Displays 2025-08-12

• A novel semi-immersive VR driving simulator (VRDS) for institutionalized older adults with advanced dementia. • The VRDS integrates realistic driving with a virtual environment to stimulate implicit memory and improve cognitive function. • Statistical analyses indicate improvements in game and mood scores over repeated sessions. • The system’s performance logging provides objective measures of implicit learning and motor adaptation in advanced dementia. • The logging system offers a practical alternative to standard cognitive assessments in advanced dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication Technology to Retrain Attention and Enhance Functional Communication Following Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Clinical Case Report

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 29 out of 100. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups 2024-11-11

Through systematic instruction and retraining visual and sustained attention, the patient was able to engage meaningfully with a high-tech device to increase functional personal choice when supported by a partner. 2 key findings →

Design: case report Evidence: low

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

Can Telehealth Improve Access to Amyloid-Targeting Therapies for Veterans Living With Alzheimer Disease?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 29 out of 100. Federal Practitioner 2025-12-01

The VHA is well-positioned to use a hybrid approach-both telehealth and in-person care-to support the provision of amyloid-targeting therapies for veterans with AD. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

A machine learning framework for early-stage dementia-friendly architectural design evaluation using visual access metrics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 29 out of 100. Architectural Intelligence 2025-07-10

The results suggest a viable pathway for developing ML support tools to provide feedback on DDP compliance at an early design stage. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

A Smart RFID-Driven System for Dementia Patient Tracking: A Machine Learning Approach for Monitoring and Localization

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 29 out of 100. International Journal of Technology 2025-12-01

The global increase in the elderly population, which is expected to reach 2.1 billion by 2050, has highlighted the need for reliable monitoring systems to assist elderly individuals, especially those with dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

↑ 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.

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 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.

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 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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed