Incident dementia diagnoses increased in MA relative to traditional Medicare, despite an overall downward trend in diagnosis rates. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Persons with dementia were significantly more likely to enter HHC directly from the community (60% vs. 37%, adjusted OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.50-1.53). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Dementia Datahub (https://dementiadatahub.org/) currently provides mapping, data reporting dashboards, system documentation, and public use files (available upon request) of statistics from the year 2020. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Improved performance and increased self-reported daily use of the hearing aid were observed after the period of guidance and telemonitoring via the system for all research participants. 4 key findings →
Participants: 43 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study aims to analyze the spatial planning and operational strategies of three profile nursing homes in Copenhagen, Denmark-Hørgården, Peder Lykke Center, and Ørestad Plejecenter-and to derive design and operational implications for the development of Korean unit-based long-term care facilities for older adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
32/100
Reasons for declining included mis-association with hospice, not seeing additional benefit to current care, and reluctance to change current care. 3 key findings →
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
Higher densities of civic organizations were associated with lower county dementia incidence, while museums and recreational facilities were associated with lower prevalence and incidence. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From 1999 to 2004, the U.S. age-adjusted annual death rate per 100,000 for dementia was 628 in blacks and 647 in whites. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
fifty-five geriatricians responded. Ninety-one per cent were consultant physicians, and 71% were not involved in outpatient diagnostic services. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Thirty thousand three hundred and ninety-eight deaths attributable to dementia as the underlying or related cause (multiple causes) were reported during 2015-2019. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
32/100
These findings suggest that caregivers living in rural regions may depend more on informal support for meeting basic care needs of their relative living with dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 163 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Unmet need for long-term care (LTC) could be associated with higher health care utilization and medical spending. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
As rural areas have lower reported ADRD prevalence compared to urban areas in spite of lower educational attainment (which should lead to higher ADRD prevalence) this argues that the true burden of ADRD is likely underestimated in areas without adequate detection resources. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
Understanding and addressing SDOH associated with hospitalizations among AI/AN older adults, with and without dementia, may aid in the development of strategies that reduce preventable hospitalization. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Idiopathic rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (iRBD) is characterized by the loss of atonia during REM sleep, causing dream-enacting behavior. 4 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
32/100
Overall, our findings suggest that greater neighborhood disadvantage may influence select domains of memory, and that one’s self-reported loneliness may influence how this relationship manifests. 4 key findings →
Participants: 136 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Specifically, higher inflammation was associated with worse processing speed (B = -0.01; p < .05) and working memory (B = 8323.66; p < .1) only among those from more disadvantaged neighborhoods. 3 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The role of noise pollution as a risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD) is unclear, with observational studies yielding conflicting results susceptible to confounding and reverse causality. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The onset and sustenance of Alzheimers and Parkinsons is solely dependent on the driving power of the immune cytokine interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), arising from neuronal distress and release of sAPPα, which activates microglia for synthesis and release of IL-1β driving synthesis of βAPP, Aβ plaques and synthesis and activation of MAPKp38 for phosphorylation of tau for neurofibrillary tangle formation in Alzheimers and for a-synuclein for formation of Lewy bodies in Parkinsons. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by amyloid plaque deposition, neurofibrillary tangles, and chronic neuroinflammation. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia and one of the leading causes of death in adults age 65 y or older in the United States. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
To the Editor: We have recently highlighted the potential pitfalls of amyloid-beta (Aβ) PET, suggesting that both Aβ and tau assessments are necessary to relate clinical symptoms to Alzheimer disease (AD) pathology.1 Herein, we would like to present 3 additional cases related to the clinical practice of disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for AD. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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.
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 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.
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 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 →