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

27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 26–50 of 109 studies (page 2 of 5) · 27,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 109 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Showing 109 studies tagged deaths — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Subjects

Authors

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

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.

Searching for atrial fibrillation: looking harder, looking longer, and in increasingly sophisticated ways. An EHRA position paper

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. EP Europace 2022-08-24

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common clinical arrhythmia with substantial health and socioeconomic impact on healthcare.1 The number of people affected by this condition was estimated to be 33.5 million in 2010, with an increasing prevalence and incidence over the coming years.2 In 2017, there were 37.6 million [95% confidence interval (CI): 32.5–42.6 million] individuals with AF/atrial flutter globally.3 The estimated number of subjects with AF in 2030 in Europe will be 14–17 million, and the number of new cases of AF per year at 120 000–215 000.4 Atrial fibrillation is independently associated with increased mortality and morbidity from complications such as ischaemic stroke, dementia, and cognitive dysfunction.5 Oral anticoagulation can significantly reduce the risk of stroke, dementia, and death.6 As a part of a holistic or integrated approach to AF care, it is associated with improved outcomes7–9 and is advocated in guidelines.10,11 In many patients, AF can be asymptomatic, and the diagnosis is established after the appearance of a complication typically associated with AF, such as ischaemic stroke/systemic embolic or heart failure. 5 key findings →

Participants: 280 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Cohort Profile Update: The Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. International Journal of Epidemiology 2022-02-25

Therefore, respective software was developed in-house.8,9 Segmentation results are then analysed for potential associations with disease risks and to establish reference intervals of organ size and function.10 SHIP is also used as a basis for meta-research with a particular focus on incidental MRI findings and their effects on study participants.11,12 With its large amount of standardized data and the option to internally replicate findings from SHIP-START using data of the independent SHIP-TREND, the project offers good opportunities to apply new bioinformatical tools to mine the data and gain new insights into risk factors and pathomechanisms. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers and the general community: a prospective cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. The Lancet. Public health 2020-07-31

We sought to assess risk of COVID-19 among front-line health-care workers compared with the general community and the effect of personal protective equipment (PPE) on risk. 2 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Comorbidity profiles among patients with bullous pemphigoid: a nationwide population-based study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. The British journal of dermatology 2011-07-28

Patients with BP are more likely to have various neurological diseases, schizophrenia and psoriasis prior to the diagnosis of BP, supporting associations found in other studies. 3 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 3,485 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Illness duration and symptom profile in symptomatic UK school-aged children tested for SARS-CoV-2

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. The Lancet. Child & adolescent health 2021-08-03

Illness duration and symptom prevalence, duration, and burden were analysed for children testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 for whom illness duration could be determined, and were assessed overall and for younger (age 5-11 years) and older (age 12-17 years) groups. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Risk factors and disease profile of post-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection in UK users of the COVID Symptom Study app: a prospective, community-based, nested, case-control study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. The Lancet. Infectious diseases 2021-09-01

This prospective, community-based, nested, case-control study used self-reported data (eg, on demographics, geographical location, health risk factors, and COVID-19 test results, symptoms, and vaccinations) from UK-based, adult (≥18 years) users of the COVID Symptom Study mobile phone app. 5 key findings →

Design: case-control study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Prevalence and Costs of Discharge Diagnoses in Inpatient General Internal Medicine: a Multi-center Cross-sectional Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Journal of general internal medicine 2018-07-27

GIM services care for a markedly heterogeneous population but the most common conditions were similar across 7 hospitals. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 223 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Guide to Preventive Cardiology for Women

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Circulation 1999-05-11

C oronary heart disease (CHD) is the single leading cause of death and a significant cause of morbidity among American women. 1 Risk factors for CHD in women are well documented. 2 Compelling data from epidemiological studies and randomized clinical trials show that CHD is largely preventable.

Participants: 2,763 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

The effect of emergency department crowding on the management of pain in older adults with hip fracture

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2006-02-01

Older adults with hip fracture are at risk for underassessment of pain, considerable delays in analgesic administration after pain is identified, and treatment with inappropriate analgesics (e.g., meperidine) in the ED. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Contribution of individual diseases to death in older adults with multiple diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2012-06-26

The use of methods that focus on determining a single underlying cause may lead to underestimation of the extent of the contribution of some diseases such as dementia and respiratory disease to death in older adults and overestimation of the contribution of other diseases. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Beyond comorbidity: expanding the definition and measurement of complexity among older adults using administrative claims data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Medical care 2014-03-01

Claims data studies that include indicators of potentially diminished patient functional status better capture heterogeneity of patients with multiple chronic conditions. 1 key finding →

Participants: 72,056 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Patient-related risk factors for periprosthetic joint infection and postoperative mortality following total hip arthroplasty in Medicare patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume 2012-05-01

The purpose of this study was to identify the specific patient comorbidities that are associated with an increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection and of ninety-day postoperative mortality in U.S. Results Comorbid conditions associated with an increased adjusted risk of periprosthetic joint infection (in decreasing order of significance, p < 0.05 for all comparisons) were rheumatologic disease (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.71), obesity (HR = 1.73), coagulopathy (HR = 1.58), and preoperative anemia (HR = 1.36). 4 key findings →

Participants: 40,919 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Development of comorbidities in men with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy: an Australian population-based cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases 2018-05-02

Men with prostate cancer treated with androgen deprivation therapy had a higher likelihood of developing new comorbidities than men who did not receive androgen deprivation therapy. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Management of Menopause-Related Symptoms

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Annals of Internal Medicine 2005-06-21

NIH Conferences21 June 2005National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Management of Menopause-Related SymptomsFREENIH State-of-the-Science Panel*NIH State-of-the-Science Panel*Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-142-12_Part_1-200506210-00117 SectionsAboutVisual AbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail National Institutes of Health (NIH) consensus and state-of-the-science statements are prepared by independent panels of health professionals and public representatives on the basis of 1) the results of a systematic literature review prepared under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), 2) presentations by investigators working in areas relevant to the conference questions during a 2-day public session, 3) questions and statements from conference attendees during open discussion periods that are part of the public session, and 4) closed deliberations by the panel during the remainder of the second day and the morning of the third. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

From across this tag

7 of the 109 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 7. The same 7 appear here every time.

↑ 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 27,780 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.

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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.

1,034 records (3.7% 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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed