36/100
Diabetes in the elderly is a growing public health burden. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
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.
The authors critically reviewed 26 international and American outcome studies that assessed the effect of psychiatric comorbidity on length of stay for medical/surgical inpatients. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium is a common and severe neuropsychiatric syndrome characterised by acute deterioration and fluctuations in mental status. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This privileging, also known as implicit rationing, is theoretically and physiologically associated with a rise in the incidence of complications such as pressure injuries, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and delirium. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium affects 60 to 80% of ventilated patients and is associated with worse clinical outcomes including death. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Benzodiazepine (BZD) inappropriate use (i.e., misuse and overuse) is a worldwide public health problem. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite the development and wide distribution of guidelines for pneumonia, death from pneumonia is increasing due to population aging. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This report reviews evidence on disorders related to inadequate vitamin D repletion in older people. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most decline occurred prior to hospitalization and was associated with common indicators of poor outcomes in hospitalized elders. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
With the upcoming reform of the healthcare system and the greater emphasis on care in the home and other living environments, geriatric providers will need alternate ways of monitoring disease, activity, response to therapy, and patient safety. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults who survive critical illness have physical and cognitive declines resulting in disability at greater rates than hospitalized, noncritically ill and community dwelling older adults. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Numerous reports have linked extremity muscle strength with mortality but the mechanism underlying this association is not known. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium is a frequent neurocognitive complication in patients with cancer, particularly in patients with advanced-stage disease (in whom a combination of factors might trigger an episode) and in patients with a high degree of predisposing vulnerability, such as the elderly or patients with dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
Average life expectancy throughout developed countries has rapidly increased during the latter half of the 20th century and geriatric infectious diseases have become an increasingly important issue. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Instances of futile care evoke strong emotional responses from nurses, and nurses require support in dealing with their distress. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Until relatively recently, most psychologists have had limited professional involvement with older adults. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The 21 conditions selected as targets for quality improvement among vulnerable older adults include (in rank order): pharmacologic management; depression; dementia; heart failure; stroke (and atrial fibrillation); hospitalization and surgery; falls and mobility disorders; diabetes mellitus; end-of-life care; ischemic heart disease; hypertension; pressure ulcers; osteoporosis; urinary incontinence; pain management; preventive services; hearing impairment; pneumonia and influenza; vision impairment; malnutrition; and osteoarthritis. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This article reports the findings of a policy survey designed to establish research priorities to inform future research strategy and advance nursing home practice. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
End-of-life transitions between health care settings are common across EU countries, in particular late hospitalizations for people residing at home. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overuse or misuse of tests and treatments exposes patients to potential harm. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older people reaching end-of-life status are particularly at risk of adverse effects of drug therapy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
More than two-thirds of long-stay nursing home residents suffer from dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
We identify two main ED physician-perceived barriers to PC provision: lack of access to medical records and lack of 24/7 availability of PC team. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The need for end-of-life care is going to increase substantially in many countries in the coming decades. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The majority of deaths in the United States occur in the geriatric population. 5 key findings →
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.
- Universal care under strain: navigating population ageing in Europe
- Determinants of medical expenditures in the last 6 months of life
- Physical inactivity and non-communicable disease burden in low-income, middle-income and high-income countries
- Importance of diffuse aspiration bronchiolitis caused by chronic occult aspiration in the elderly
- Physical restraints in geriatric care in Sweden: prevalence and patient characteristics
- Walking and Talking: Recommendations for Doing Mobile Interviews with Older Adults
- Long-term neurocognitive function after critical illness
- Child maltreatment and incident mental disorders in middle and older ages: a retrospective UK Biobank cohort study
- Discontinuation of Preventive Medicines in Older People with Limited Life Expectancy: A Systematic Review
- Protocol for a meta-review of interventions to prevent and manage ICU delirium
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 →