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

31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 51–75 of 76 studies in Risk factors · tagged Policy (page 3 of 4) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 76 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.

Other subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,851 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Risk factors” covers

Risk factors — Conditions, exposures and habits linked to a higher or lower chance of dementia, and how strong each link is.

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.

Associations between Social Determinants of Health and Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia among American Indian and Alaska Native and White Medicare Beneficiaries

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 34 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2024-12-01

SDOH are potentially modifiable factors, therefore, a deeper understanding of their effects on ADRD can inform future interventions aimed at reducing ADRD prevalence and disparities. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Chronic Disease and Disability in the United States: Trends, Inequities, and Imperatives for Policy Reform

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 34 out of 100. Milbank Quarterly 2026-08-14

In 2023, US life expectancy reached 78.5 years and healthy life expectancy 64.5 years, both still below prepandemic 2019 levels, with a persistent 13-14-year gap between life expectancy and healthy life expectancy. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Factors influencing medication adherence among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia (ADRD)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 33 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2021-12-01

Adherence to ADRD medications was not associated with specialist availability but was related to individual and socioeconomic context factors in community‐dwelling older individuals with ADRD. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

The socio-economic determinants of COVID-19: A spatial analysis of German county level data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 33 out of 100. Not indexed 2020-07-07

The case and death rates are, for example, significantly positively associated with early cases from the beginning of the epidemic, the average age, the population density and the number of people employed in elderly care. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

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

Rural‐urban disparities in Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia: The role of state‐level nurse practitioner policies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

ADRD mortality rates were slightly higher in rural areas compared to urban areas, with no significant differences between rural-adjacent and rural-nonadjacent counties in recent years. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Shared Commitment and Distinct Innovations in Dementia Policy Development and Implementation in China, Japan, and South Korea

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 29 out of 100. Asia-Pacific Psychiatry 2026-03-29

In conclusion, while differing in healthcare infrastructure, China, Japan, and South Korea converge in anchoring dementia care within the community. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Improving Care Through Public Policy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100. The Gerontologist 2017-10-20

As has been noted, Alzheimer’s and related dementias are underdiagnosed and when diagnoses are made, they are too often undisclosed by clinicians: studies suggest that fewer than half of individuals report being told of their diagnoses (Alzheimer’s Association, 2015). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Short-Term Impacts of COVID-19 Public Health Regulation on Consumer Food Purchases: A Case Study From a Grocery Store in Montana

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 28 out of 100. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 2022-02-01

The mitigation measures (e.g., lockdown policies) in response to the COVID-19 pandemic impacted food systems in unprecedented ways, in both scope and immediacy. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Promoting Healthy Aging: Public Health as a Leader for Reducing Dementia Risk

⚠ Report — not peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Public Policy & Aging Report 2023-07-15

It is estimated that for people aged 65 years and older, the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease was nearly double for women compared with men (Weinstein et al., 2012). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Sequence-based variant-effect predictions reveal trait-specific regulatory-layer profiles of complex-trait heritability

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-10-19

Partitioned-heritability studies have shown which tissues carry the heritability of complex traits, but whether the regulatory layer whose annotations are most informative for heritability within a tissue differs between traits has not been tested, because measured annotations for different layers come from different sets of biosamples. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

The Role and Future Potential of Radio, Podcasts, and YouTube in Influencing Awareness and Policy on Neurodegenerative Diseases in the Arab Gulf: A Focus on Oman, Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Preprints.org 2026-10-14

The increasing prevalence of neurodegenerative diseases (NDs), especially Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, is a major public health concern in the Gulf countries (GCs) due to the rapid increase in life expectancy and population aging. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Association between urban green space coverage and incident Alzheimer’s disease among older adults in metropolitan South Korea: a population-based retrospective cohort study

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. Research Square 2026-09-14

Higher UGS coverage was associated with a lower risk of incident AD among older adults in urban South Korea. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 95,822 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Air Pollution, Health, and Economics: Evaluating the Impact of WHO targets and Guideline Values on Mortality and Morbidity in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

⚠ Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 16 out of 100. medRxiv 2026-03-30

Direct medical and productivity-related costs associated with incident cases were estimated using a cost-of-illness (COI) framework. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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. Show only studies that are free to read

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 31,380 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.

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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.

1,048 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