27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among the 23 studies, 10 (43.5%) focused on mobile health apps, 8 (34.8%) on video consultations, and 5 (21.7%) on remote monitoring tools. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 23 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
We tested the trained model using five other studies, three of which used PET as a biomarker of significant amyloid β burden (testing the deep learning model between amyloid β positive vs amyloid β negative). 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study Participants: 648 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 704 records met the inclusion criteria for bibliometric analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 704 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study included 54 articles, comprising 14,446 participants from 10 countries. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 54 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The effects on depression and other outcomes were consistent with those observed for in-person programs, suggesting the viability of well-designed automated intervention. 2 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 274 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Improving digital technology for caregivers requires studies with larger populations and longitudinal outcomes. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 240 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
One hundred sixteen participants consented and 93 (46 waitlist control, 47 intervention) were included in the analyses. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 93 Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a large and dramatic shift to video-based telehealth use in home-based primary care. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 153 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of the 62 caregivers approached, 60 enrolled (96.7%), and 54 completed the study (90% retention). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 172 participants were randomized. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 172 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Future studies should prioritize short-term interventions and develop integrated approaches combining individual and group formats. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 750 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Ninety-one reviews provided evidence on the impact of telemedicine in dementia care. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) places growing strains on family caregivers. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The role of NPT has been largely explored in AD and dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Person-centered care provides a critical framework for dementia support in long-term care facilities, emphasizing attention to each resident's evolving needs, personal history, preferences, and values. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Tele-STAR reduced caregiver burden and retained good program and treatment fidelity to STAR-C. We found Tele-STAR reduced caregiver burden and had good fidelity to the original protocol. 4 key findings →
Participants: 13 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A preliminary search yielded 4772 studies, of which 12 (0.25%) met the criteria. 5 key findings →
Participants: 232 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Frequently reported factors included self-management support, information access, and enhanced communication, although these were not consistently addressed across all reviews. 5 key findings →
Design: umbrella review Participants: 279 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia, particularly Alzheimer's Disease, continues to be a significant global health concern, driven by increasing prevalence as the population ages. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study constitutes both a scoping review and a concept analysis, as it systematically examines digital literacy across settings (home, assisted living facilities, and other long-term care facilities) in the context of persons with dementia and their caregivers. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 258 usernames posted on the forum since its inception. 5 key findings →
Participants: 893 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Family caregivers of individuals with Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia (AD/ADRD) face significant emotional and logistical challenges that place them at heightened risk for stress, anxiety, and depression. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
With the rising number of dementia cases, supporting family caregivers to maintain their well-being is crucial. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study is one the first to account of attribute development for a DCE examining the public preferences for autonomy enhancing dementia care in Ireland. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
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 27,780 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 →