Respite for individuals caring for family living with dementia is a common way to take personal time away from caregiving. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
While both caregivers participated in physical activity, their case studies reveal opportunities to optimize physical activity interventions to support members of the caregiving dyad: (1) targeting mitochondrial fitness—the ability of mitochondria to maintain energy homeostasis with aging—so participants can mitigate the onset of NCDs, fatigue, and overall health outcomes; (2) promoting the self-care and psychological benefits of physical activity such as improved mood and social connectedness; and (3) improving the accurate perceptions of participants’ health and physical activity with specific measurable markers of physical activity. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
34/100
Four attributes distinguished situations in which either approach is preferred: understanding, trust, readiness, and momentum. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The first three elements concerned common awareness of collaborative ACP in dementia care, role clarification for various professions and actively working towards shared goals in collaborative ACP in dementia care. 5 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of these, a growing number have secured funding, initiated collaborations, contributed to dementia palliative care research, and increased confidence and comfort with conducting clinical trials (p<.05). 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Awareness of caregiver distress, burnout, and early grief, as a result of the loss of their loved one’s personhood, has increased. 3 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Artificial intelligence (AI) has gained attention as a tool to support dementia care through efficient and personalized interventions. 5 key findings →
Participants: 19 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study explores how older people with dementia and their family caregivers experience the process from diagnosis to follow-up in primary care, what support is needed, what works well and what could be improved. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
BackgroundWith the growing demand for dementia-friendly care environments, existing smart room designs often lack systematic methods to translate user needs into functional solutions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Various negative and positive aspects, along with specific needs, were identified. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Voluntary assisted dying (VAD) is an end-of-life care option available to eligible Australians living with a terminal condition, though people living with dementia are typically ineligible to choose VAD as part of their end-of-life care. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A balanced understanding of dementia’s impact (acknowledging both continuity and loss, alternatives and socially constructed aspects) better reflects the realities of dementia and creates new possibilities for supportive care practices to improve pain management and quality of life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These inputs and activities were shown in the logic model to result in short, medium, and long-term outcomes, including reduced healthcare resource use and increased quality of life for people with dementia at the end of life. 2 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The views of care home staff and relatives had similarities in general terms regarding the problems arising around expressions of sexuality in care homes: indicting that a light-hearted or non-physical connection between residents is deemed acceptable, but the moment it becomes a sexual relationship then decision making becomes more complicated. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There were few differences in how MA plan characteristics affected choice among older adults with and without dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
32/100
These findings suggest that caregivers living in rural regions may depend more on informal support for meeting basic care needs of their relative living with dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 163 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Respite goal achievement on a given week predicted improvements in participants' ratings of their respite time-use outcomes one week later. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
32/100
Caregiving interventions can reduce caregiver burden and promote caregiver competence, yet caregiving is rooted in culture, with differing impacts of the caregiving role. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The analysis revealed six main themes: 'Core health care challenges,' 'communication approaches and information sharing,' 'role of GP,' 'situation of caregivers,' 'influence on caregiver-GP relationship,' and 'socio-cultural barriers and care preferences'. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The proposed protocol for the CAREFIT programme represents an innovative and multidisciplinary initiative that leverages a digital platform to promote the well-being of informal caregivers of people with dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
People use advance directives to express preferences that direct their future care when they lack decision-making capacity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The logic model and summary results explain in detail how this dementia palliative care service undertook activities relating to person-centred care, carer support, end-of-life care, accessible care, timely care, and integrated care. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study explored the views and experiences of Australians living with dementia relating to voluntary assisted dying (VAD) as an end-of-life care option. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Advance care planning (ACP) in dementia has been defined as a communication process adapted to the person’s capacity, which includes, and is continued with family, in our European Association for Palliative Care Delphi study Delphi study with an expert panel from 33 countries. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
32/100
For people with dementia (n = 6), readiness was facilitated by a desire for autonomy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
From across this tag
10 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 10. The same 10 appear here every time.
- Evaluation of Technology-Based Interventions for Informal Caregivers of Patients With Dementia-A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- Advance Care Planning in Nursing Homes - Improving the Communication Among Patient, Family, and Staff: Results From a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial (COSMOS)
- Family caregivers' conceptualisation of quality end-of-life care for people with dementia: A qualitative study
- Caregiving burdens of task time and task difficulty among paid and unpaid caregivers of persons living with dementia
- Advance Care Planning in Dementia: Do Family Carers Know the Treatment Preferences of People with Early Dementia?
- Insight for impairment in independent living skills in Alzheimer's disease and multi-infarct dementia
- Predicting psychological distress in informal caregivers of older people with dementia: development and interpretation of a nomogram and XGBoost model
- Predictors of complicated grief among dementia caregivers: a prospective study of bereavement
- Reminiscence and Digital Storytelling to Improve the Social and Emotional Well-Being of Older Adults With Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study Design and a Randomized Controlled Trial
- A comprehensive, stage-sensitive model of grief in dementia caregiving
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 →