from 9,176 records, we included 23 studies (n = 354,985 participants). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 354,985 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Among the 23 studies, 10 (43.5%) focused on mobile health apps, 8 (34.8%) on video consultations, and 5 (21.7%) on remote monitoring tools. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 23 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Costs were calculated using cost function figures compared with usual costs. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 847 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Behavioral treatment is a safe and effective conservative intervention that should be made more readily available to patients as a first-line treatment for urge and mixed incontinence. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A systematic approach to the management of pain significantly reduced agitation in residents of nursing homes with moderate to severe dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 175 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
79/100
Nineteen interventional studies, including 3,985 participants, were identified. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 3,985 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
Levels of apathy decreased slightly in both groups (mean decrease in AES-I of .61 points, 95% CI -3.54, 2.33 for TBI and .36 points, 95% CI -3.27, 2.55 for CAS). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 162 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Community occupational therapy intervention for patients with dementia and their care givers is successful and cost effective, especially in terms of informal care giving. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 135 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Promotion of person centred care and good practice in the management of patients with dementia with behavioural symptoms provides an effective alternative to neuroleptics. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Such targeted approaches may not present a fair picture of overall quality and may lead to unintended incentives ("gaming the system") (7). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 200 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
75/100
More than half (55.65%) of AL residents had a diagnosis of SMI, among them 93.2% had major depression, 28.5% schizophrenia, and 22.2% bipolar disorder. 4 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 289,350 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
75/100
receipt of (1) any mental health treatment (medication or psychotherapy); (2) any psychotherapy in a calendar quarter. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,913,945 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium was associated with a higher risk of nursing home admission in participants without dementia (SHR 1.23, 95% CI 1.14-1.34) and with pre-existing dementia (SHR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07-1.38). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 13 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review confirms that clinically significant NPSs are common in NH patients with dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,458 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
20% of individuals with newly identified dementia were homebound and this group was more functionally impaired, medically complex, and socioeconomically disadvantaged as compared to the non-homebound. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort Participants: 939 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 23 892 individuals moving-in to care homes, 20 250 (84.8%) died by 31 May 2020. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 892 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
70/100
Three ACP interventions focused on mild dementia and seven on advanced dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review 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
Evidence suggests that people living with cognitive impairment value opportunities to be involved in everyday decision-making about their care. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Not only dementia diagnosis but also time spent with the diagnosis was crucial for the use of LTC in the month preceding death, in particular residential care. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 6,294 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on the psychometric qualities and criteria regarding sensitivity and clinical utility, we conclude that PACSLAC and DOLOPLUS2 are the most appropriate scales currently available. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Validity of studies was graded by two authors independently using a standardised checklist. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
The outcomes of each model of care differ and correspond to the model's focus. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
9 of the 199 studies in this tag, picked by a fixed rule (a hash of each study's address), not by score or date; each page of this list shows a different 9. The same 9 appear here every time.
- Breaking Social Isolation Amidst COVID‐19: A Viewpoint on Improving Access to Technology in Long‐Term Care Facilities
- Development and preliminary validation of the pain assessment checklist for seniors with limited ability to communicate (PACSLAC)
- The Nuts and Bolts of Utilizing Telemedicine in Nursing Homes - The GeriCare@North Experience
- Technologies to Support Community-Dwelling Persons With Dementia: A Position Paper on Issues Regarding Development, Usability, Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness, Deployment, and Ethics
- Dementia and COVID-19 infection control in assisted living in seven states
- Everyday ethics in assisted living facilitites: a framework for assessing resident-focused issues
- Costs of care for dementia patients in community setting: an analysis for mild and moderate disease stage
- An ethnographic study of stigma and ageism in residential care or assisted living
- Transitions in care for older adults with and without dementia
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 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 →