27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The inclusion criteria for peer-reviewed English publications from March 2020 to August 2022 consisted of studies related to telehealth services for people living with dementia and their family caregivers and studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 24 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's disease (AD) accounts for 60-70% of the population with dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 196 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study evaluates the efficacy, safety, and economics of galantamine in the treatment of Alzheimer disease (AD) patients, and to provide evidence-based reference for optimizing drug selection, dosing strategies, and reimbursement policies in clinical practice. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Discussions revealed that people were generally supportive of this type of research, provided they gave informed consent and that devices were discreet, comfortable and easy to use. 4 key findings →
Participants: 30 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 15,390 narratives collected from 3139 patients with PsA for exploratory analysis, physical concepts were the most common (81.5%), followed by emotional (50.7%), cognitive (20.0%), role activity (8.1%), and social (5.6%) concepts. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,139 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 421,131 MA beneficiaries, telehealth use increased sharply in Q2 2020 for both ADRD and non-ADRD groups, peaking at 33.9 and 30.6% respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The expert panel from Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia discussed the current situation of various topics related to the diagnostics, general management and treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in these Central Eastern European (CEE) countries, representing around 88 million population. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Technology offers opportunities to support older adults with mild cognitive impairments to remain independent and socially connected, but is often not used. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Reimbursement decisions for new Alzheimer's disease (AD) treatments are informed by economic evaluations. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 1673 teleconsultations conducted with 850 unique patients. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There were 13,700 beneficiaries with full-year enrollment in MA (6,046) or TM (7,724), 518 with ADRD and 13,252 without ADRD. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The overall design-oriented need referred to clear situation classifications including urgent care (fall- and wandering detection), non-urgent care (deviations in eating, drinking, sleeping), and future care (risk predictions). 2 key findings →
Participants: 25 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
About 40 000 individuals depend on assisted living in long-term care facilities in Norway. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found a significant increase in the likelihood of AWV uptake among telehealth adopters by 10.2 percentage points (p <0.001) than non-adopters of telehealth in traditional FFS Medicare plans. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found a significant increase in the likelihood of AWV uptake among telehealth adopters by 10.2 percentage points (p <0.001) than non-adopters of telehealth in traditional FFS Medicare plans. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Artificial intelligence (AI) has stimulated extensive research in clinical neurology, but relatively few AI systems have meaningfully changed bedside decision-making. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been particularly challenging for nursing home staff and residents. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To examine telehealth adoption and discontinuation by home health agencies (HHAs) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of telehealth pre-pandemic diffusion into the industry and its continued use once the pandemic abated. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Remote monitoring (RM) technology can support home-based dementia care by enabling (in)formal caregivers to monitor the health and safety of people with dementia remotely. 1 key finding →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this update, we examine a checklist for real-world evidence use in Medicare drug price negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act, a review of health technology assessment reassessments across major health technology assessment agencies, and two complementary studies that used natural experiment approaches to explore the relationship between herpes zoster vaccination and reduced dementia risk. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Video use remains low in primary care telehealth consultations. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a global problem affecting 58 million people, expected to reach a prevalence of 88 million people by 2050. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our study underscores the role of telehealth in increasing AWV uptake and facilitating cognitive assessments. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
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 →