30,980 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
People living with dementia and their care partners benefit from services and supports from a wide variety of healthcare and social service professionals. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 0.01). We also found that greater use of emotion-focused coping and deriving greater gains in caregiving mitigated the negative association between caregiver financial difficulty and their distress and perception of PwSDs' well-being. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Caregivers whose care recipients were female ( B = −0.29, p = 0.006), had more chronic conditions ( B = 0.31, p = 0.011), and had lower Mini-Mental State Exam scores ( B = −0.20, p = 0.015) reported higher task time burdens. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 2369 caregivers participated in the survey. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,369 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
All concurrent validity correlations followed the expected directionality, with 19/21 inter-scale correlations in the total sample reaching statistical significance (p<0.05), and 17/21 reaching at least a low correlation (0.3). 4 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite comprising the largest segment of the sexual minority population and experiencing unique stressors and health disparities, bi+ dementia caregivers remain underrepresented in health and caregiving research. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 125 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
"Rapid-type" caregivers (n = 12) had a median age of 59 (range 45-73) years; 6 were female, and 9 were spouses. 5 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundLet's Talk Tech (LTT) is a self-administered web intervention for people with memory loss and their care partners that supports decision-making about digital health technologies. 5 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Although many studies have reported small to moderate statistically significant effects on a broad range of outcomes, only a small proportion of these studies achieved clinically meaningful outcomes. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Estimates suggest that there are more than 10 million adult caregivers of persons with dementia, two-thirds of who experience some form of sleep disturbance during the course of their caregiving career. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown produced psychological consequences in caregivers of pwD, with an increase of levels of depression. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
COVID-19 pandemic in Argentina has affected the care of older adults with dementia deeply. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Previous studies have suggested that 4 latent constructs (depressed affect, well-being, interpersonal problems, somatic symptoms) underlie the item responses on the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,183 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 115,757 NH residents with dementia who self-reported pain in the last 30 days of life. 5 key findings →
Participants: 20,585 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
PLWD proactively enrolled in a dementia care program have high baseline rates of behavioral issues and their caregivers have elevated depression and stress scores. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 195 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Within-day analyses revealed time with CRs was associated with increased HR, primarily due to negative interactions. 5 key findings →
Participants: 221 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Family caregivers provide essential care and support for individuals living with dementia, yet their contributions and needs are often unrecognized within formal health care systems. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In total, 3028 posts were retrieved, including 1552 from older adult-related subreddits and 1476 from Alzheimer disease-related subreddits; 18 key topics were identified, with the most frequent topics being expressing feelings (2178/3028, 71.93%) and seeking advice and support (1982/3028, 65.46%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Daily informal care time was 0.5 hours higher in moderate compared to mild and 1.3h higher in severe compared to mild cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Participants: 5,369 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Current Care and Support: Four themes emerged: Communication with empathy; Written information valuable but could be overwhelming; Referrals provided but not necessarily followed; A focus on prescribed anti-dementia medications. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 13 Evidence: low
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
The review consistently identified high levels of perceived stress among dementia caregivers. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Living with dementia requires decision making about numerous topics including daily activities and advance care planning (ACP). 1 key finding →
Design: umbrella review Participants: 21 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
While great strides have been made recently in improving end-of-life care in the United States, people with dementia often die with inadequate pain control, with feeding tubes in place, and without the benefits of hospice care. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
No correlation with neuropsychiatric symptoms such as apathy and depression was found. 2 key findings →
Participants: 82 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.
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 30,980 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 30,980 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.2% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.4%), 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.
1,042 records (3.4% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 967 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