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 326–350 of 866 studies (page 14 of 35) · 27,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Showing 866 studies tagged mortality — 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.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 13,259 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

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.

Prevalence of depression among older Americans: the Aging, Demographics and Memory Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. International psychogeriatrics 2009-06-12

The finding of similar prevalence estimates for depression in men and women was not consistent with prior research that has shown a female predominance. 3 key findings →

Participants: 851 Evidence: low

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

The association of race, gender, and comorbidity with mortality and function after hip fracture

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences 2008-08-01

The finding of higher mortality and worse mobility for nonwhite patients with hip fractures highlights the need for more research on race/ethnicity disparities in hip fracture care. 3 key findings →

Participants: 2,692 Evidence: moderate

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

Itch prevalence and characteristics in a Hispanic geriatric population: a comprehensive study using a standardized itch questionnaire

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Acta dermato-venereologica 2015-04-01

A cross-sectional study of geriatric patients was performed to provide a comprehensive description of the prevalence and clinical characteristics of chronic itch affecting Hispanic geriatric subjects in Mexico. 1 key finding →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 302 Evidence: low

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

Geographic Variation in Diagnosis Frequency and Risk of Death Among Medicare Beneficiaries

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. JAMA 2011-03-15

Diagnosis frequency ranged across HRRs from 0.58 chronic conditions in Grand Junction, Colorado, to 1.23 in Miami, Florida (mean, 0.90 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.89-0.91]; median, 0.87 [interquartile range, 0.80-0.96]). 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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

Machine Learning for Predicting Postoperative Functional Disability and Mortality Among Older Patients With Cancer: Retrospective Cohort Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. JMIR Aging 2025-05-14

This study included 33,355 patients in the training, 14,294 in the internal validation, and 6711 in the external validation sets. 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 33,355 Evidence: moderate

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

Delirium after surgery: a retrospective study of predictors, complications, and screening patterns in the national surgical quality improvement program

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. EClinicalMedicine 2025-11-08

Delirium screening was performed exclusively in patients aged ≥75 years, accounting for 7.3% of all surgical patients. 5 key findings →

Participants: 23,100 Evidence: low

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

Presenting complaints and emergency triage priority of older adults hospitalized with delirium: a retrospective cohort study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. BMC Geriatrics 2026-02-23

Among 2889 patients with delirium (mean age 85 years; 54.7% female), 59.8% were triaged at SETS 1–2 (high priority) and 40.2% at SETS 3–4 (low priority). 5 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 2,889 Evidence: moderate

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

Identifying triggers for optimal timing of advance care planning in electronic primary health care records: a nested case-control study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. BMJ Open 2025-11-01

We included 17098 records, 4139 from deceased individuals (mean age 81) and 12959 from living individuals (mean age 79). 4 key findings →

Design: case-control study Participants: 17,098 Evidence: moderate

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

Disease and Race‐Based Differences in Inpatient Palliative Care Consultation in Cancer and Noncancer Serious Illnesses

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2025-05-07

Among 40,074 inpatient encounters (median age 72 years [IQR 62-82], 46.9% male, 22.7% Black, 4.6% Hispanic), the most common serious illness was heart failure (66.0%), followed by COPD (39.3%), kidney failure (12.4%), cancer (12.3%), and dementia (11.6%). 5 key findings →

Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high

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

Observational, longitudinal study of delirium in consecutive unselected acute medical admissions: age-specific rates and associated factors, mortality and re-admission

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. BMJ open 2015-11-16

Delirium affected a fifth of acute medical admissions and a third of those aged ≥75 years, and was associated with increased mortality, institutionalisation and dependency, but not with increased risk of re-admission on follow-up. 4 key findings →

Participants: 308 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Feasibility and reliability of four pain self-assessment scales and correlation with an observational rating scale in hospitalized elderly demented patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences 2005-04-01

Self-assessment pain scales can be used reliably in the vast majority of older hospitalized patients with mild to moderate dementia and in nearly half of those with severe dementia. 2 key findings →

Participants: 160 Evidence: high

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Advance care planning for older people in Australia presenting to the emergency department from the community or residential aged care facilities

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Health & social care in the community 2014-12-02

The purpose of this retrospective, cross-sectional study was to determine the prevalence of advance care planning (ACP) among older people presenting to an Emergency Department (ED) from the community or a residential aged care facility. 3 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 40 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Drug utilization in Belgian nursing homes: impact of residents' and institutional characteristics

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety 2010-10-01

A high level of drug utilization, influenced by the characteristics of residents and the institution, was observed in Belgian nursing homes. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,510 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Timing of Palliative Care Consultation and the Impact on Thirty-Day Readmissions and Inpatient Mortality

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of palliative medicine 2018-12-14

Inpatient PCC reduces 30-day readmissions and inpatient mortality with the greatest impact demonstrated within six days of hospital admission. 2 key findings →

Participants: 43,463 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Medications That Older Adults in Hospice Care in the United States Take, 2007

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2015-11-04

People continue to receive disease-focused therapies at the end of life rather than therapies exclusively for palliation of symptoms, suggesting that treatments may vary according to the person's primary diagnosis. 2 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,623 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

From across this tag

10 of the 862 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 10. The same 10 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