Psychoeducational program is effective in reducing the family caregivers' perceived burden. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
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.
Care networks ranged from 1 to 8 members. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Use of potentially inappropriate medications in Australian nursing home residents with advanced dementia is common. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 65 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Late-life depression is characterized by slowed information processing, which affects all realms of cognition. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Caregivers who institutionalized their relative reported depressive symptoms and anxiety to be as high as they were while in-home caregivers. 4 key findings →
Participants: 180 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Depression, anxiety and sleep problems are the main challenges that are faced by family caregivers of patients with Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 309 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Future research should examine both current and pre-caregiving relationship quality. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A total of 2176 person living with dementia-caregiver dyads were enrolled; 1271 persons living with dementia (58.4%) and 1650 caregivers (75.8%) were female, and their mean (SD) age were 80.6 (8.5) years and 65.2 (12.3) years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,271 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From an initial cohort of 18 605 participants, 10 058 were included (5062 men [50.3%]; 4996 women [49.7%]; mean [SD] age, 60.9 [7.2] years). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 605 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
55/100
Individuals with dementia and their care partners often report dissatisfaction with the disclosure process due to insufficient information and support. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
HCPs of NH patients with advanced dementia can most commonly expect to encounter medical decisions relating to feeding problems, infections, and pain. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
For most institutionalized persons with advanced dementia, a decision to forgo hospitalization is not made until death is imminent. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Pneumonia is a common terminal event in advanced dementia for which many patients receive parenteral antibiotics. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Preliminary results suggest that hospice enrolment might be influenced by the facility or region of this particular country. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 45 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
55/100
Capacity assessments revealed that most residents could state a simple treatment preference (82.4%), but a sizable number did not retain capacity to understand treatment alternatives or appreciate the consequences of their choice. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Residents dying with advanced dementia who received SNF care in the last 90 days of life had fewer aggressive treatments and lower odds of hospital death if they also received hospice care at any point during that time. 3 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found disparities between black and white residents with ADRD both within and across facilities. 5 key findings →
Participants: 665,033 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Nearly 40% of patients with dementia in our study experienced live discharge or a long length of stay. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Prognostic discussions between caregivers of PwD and the PwD's physicians may be occurring more often; however, a high percentage of caregivers report a poor understanding about the terminal nature of dementia and the role of PC. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 80 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of 162 034 eligible Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 85.0 [7.9] years; 94 304 female [58.2%]), 51 191 (31.6%) were attributed to MSSP ACO. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 162,034 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This article provides an updated review of the determinants of caregiver burden and depression, with a focus on care demands and especially the differential effects of various neuropsychiatric symptoms or symptom clusters. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
54/100
After adjusting for sociodemographics, comorbidities, and potential caregiving network, those with normal cognition received an average of 4.6 hours per week of informal care. 4 key findings →
Participants: 7,443 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Unmet need may be useful in identifying dementia care recipients at risk for nursing home placement and death. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Caregivers' reasons for placement included (a) the need for more skilled care (65%); (b) the caregivers' health (49%); (c) the patients' dementia-related behaviors (46%); and (d) the need for more assistance (23%). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Mortality due to dementia represents a substantial global burden, and is expected to continue to grow into the future as an older, aging population expands globally. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From across this tag
9 of the 1,002 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.
- The Burden of Health Care Costs for Patients With Dementia in the Last 5 Years of Life
- Sources of stress for family members of nursing home residents with advanced dementia
- Achieving consensus and controversy around applicability of palliative care to dementia
- Forget me not: palliative care for people with dementia
- Place of death for people with dementia: A scoping review
- Context, mechanisms and outcomes in end of life care for people with advanced dementia
- Exploring advance care planning discourses in scottish dementia policies: A critical discourse analysis
- Video decision support tool for advance care planning in dementia: randomised controlled trial
- The effects of a mobile application-based dementia care intelligent recommender system on caregivers of people with dementia: a randomized controlled trial
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 →