31,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The crude incidence rate was 16 (CI: 13-20) cases per 1,000 person-years (pyr) with 17 (CI: 12-21) per 1,000 pyr for females and 14 (CI: 9-21) per 1,000 pyr for males. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 748 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Contemporary healthcare policies are designed to shape the conditions that can help delay the institutionalization of patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 9,043 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Twelve of 5536 studies met the inclusion criteria. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among Medicare beneficiaries with dementia who visited an ED, there was no evidence that hospital admission was associated with mortality rates. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 872,085 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The estimated costs of dementia in LMICs are lower than in high-income countries. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ACP billing codes from 6 months before to 6 months after admission for inpatient surgery. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 289,428 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia was diagnosed at a mean of 5.1 ± 3.4 years post-KTx. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,285 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Participants receiving CDCM showed significantly fewer behavioral and psychological symptoms (adjusted mean difference [AMD] in NPI score, -10.26 [95% CI, -16.95 to -3.58]; P = .003; Cohen d, -0.78 [95% CI, -1.09 to -0.46]), better mental health (AMD in SF-12 Mental Component Summary score, 2.26 [95% CI, 0.31-4.21]; P = .02; Cohen d, 0.26 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.51]), and lower caregiver burden (AMD in BIZA-D score, -0.59 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.37]; P Conclusions and relevance In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, CDCM was associated with improved patient, caregiver, and health system-relevant outcomes over 36 months beyond the intervention period. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 428 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Cognitive stimulation therapy for people with dementia has effectiveness advantages over, and may be more cost-effective than, treatment as usual. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 91 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Residents enrolled in managed care (n = 133) were more likely to have do-not-hospitalize orders compared with those in traditional Medicare fee for service (n = 158) (63.7% vs 50.9%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.4), were less likely to be transferred to the hospital for acute illness (3.8% vs 15.7%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-0.5), had more primary care visits per 90 days (mean [SD], 4.8 [2.6] vs 4.2 [5.0]; adjusted rate ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6), and had more nurse practitioner visits (3.0 [2.1] vs 0.8 [2.6]; adjusted rate ratio, 3.0; 95% CI, 2.2-4.1). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 133 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our sample included 3,361,950 Medicare enrollees with ADRD (2,156,995 women [64%]; mean [SD] age, 83 [8.0] years; 2,646,405 white [78%], 344,478 black [10%], 224,010 Hispanic [7%]). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,361,950 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
Despite the growth in Medicare managed care enrollment, only 9 papers report the costs of care for individuals with ADRD within these plans, and only 1 study reports data less than 10 years old. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our sample included 1001 participating and 3873 matched control SNFs. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,001 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Using a nationally representative survey of older Americans with in-home cognitive testing, researchers estimated that dementia cost the US between $157 billion and $215 billion in 2010, depending on how unpaid family caregiving time is valued. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 856 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study followed a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries who died and compared total health and long-term care spending in their final five years of life. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,702 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals with dementia live and frequently die in community settings. 1 key finding →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 524 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Successful discharge of beneficiaries with ADRD increased from 43.4% in 2007 to 53.9% in 2015 (average annual percent change (AAPC) = 2.1 (95% CI = 2.0-2.2)); those without ADRD also increased (from 59.1% to 63.6%, AAPC = 0.9 (95% CI = 0.7-1.1)) but not as fast as those with ADRD (P < .01). 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 17,043 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mean annual costs for individuals with clinically diagnosed AD were SEK 99,906, SEK 290,972, SEK 479,524, and SEK 795,617 in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), mild, moderate, and severe AD. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort Participants: 95,853 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Community dwellers with dementia were more likely than those without dementia to receive life-sustaining treatments in their last 90 days of life (advanced dementia: OR = 1.83 [1.42-2.35]; non-advanced dementia: OR = 1.16 [1.01-1.32]). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We aimed to conduct a cost-utility analysis of DREAMS START compared with treatment as usual (TAU). 4 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 377 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study provides a comprehensive estimate of the excess costs that result from providing informal dementia care in the community. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,043 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This modeling study projects that the financial toll of Alzheimer's and related dementias will grow very unevenly by race and ethnicity in the US. 4 key findings →
Design: modelling Participants: 31,028 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neither targeted lecanemab treatment nor treatment unrestricted by APOE ε4 genotype is cost-effective vs SoC alone for patients with MCI or mild dementia due to AD. 2 key findings →
Design: modelling Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
APPLE-Tree has a high probability of being cost-effective for a 1-point NTB gain, a difference previously associated with a three-fold reduction in 5-year dementia risk. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 746 Evidence: moderate
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 31,780 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 31,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (66% of the library) and OpenAlex (16%), 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.
1,052 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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 Where this research is being discussed: events