One hundred forty-nine carers enrolled in the study. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 149 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.
The intervention group showed less discomfort (-1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.88 to -0.23) and fewer sentinel events (-0.40; 95% CI = -0.64 to -0.16), specifically pneumonia (-0.08; 95% CI = -0.14, -0.02). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 116 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
62/100
Discussing future care is difficult due to uncertainties about the future and the decisional capacities of people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Five hundred and forty five patients from 67 NH units were included and randomized to the intervention ( N = 297; 36 units) and control group ( N = 248; 31 units). 5 key findings →
Participants: 72 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Residence in an SCU is associated with some, but not all, markers of better quality end-of-life care among nursing home residents with advanced dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 43 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Rural residence was also associated with lower risk of more than 10 days of hospitalization and ICU admission. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 3,710 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Importance and objective Conducting advance care planning (ACP) conversations with people with dementia and their relatives contributes to providing care according to their preferences. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This JAMA clinical review synthesizes cohort studies and meta-analyses to give physicians practical guidance on recognizing, assessing, and treating caregiver burden. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic-review Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results provide evidence for the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of extended nursing roles in dementia care, demonstrating that extended nursing roles reduce unmet needs and improve quality of life. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 417 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A structured multicomponent intervention adapted to individual risk profiles can increase the quality of life of ethnically diverse dementia caregivers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Emotion-oriented care is more effective with regard to the emotional adaptation in nursing homes of persons with a mild to moderate dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Finding positive gains reduces depressive symptoms and burden and promotespsychological well-being primarily through enhancing self-efficacy in controlling upsetting thoughts. 2 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings have implications for clinical practice and suggest that presence of a caregiver may be an important modifying variable on patient outcomes to examine in future research. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 210 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The current study is a controlled clinical investigation of two nonpharmacological treatments of depression in patients with Alzheimer's disease. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Factors of caregiver burden in regard to people with dementia living in the community were clarified in this review study. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Twelve studies were identified. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Emotion-focused, patient-centered interventions like PIPAC hold promise for advancing treatment options in the early and mild stages of dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 18 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A total of 31 studies were selected for this review, revealing six distinct categories of social support interventions for caregivers of older adults with dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
61/100
This study included 54 articles, comprising 14,446 participants from 10 countries. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 54 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Nineteen articles involving 142,772 participants were included. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 142,772 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This meta-analysis pooled 84 studies comparing family caregivers to demographically similar non-caregivers on stress, depression, well-being, physical health, and self-efficacy. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
60/100
In this national case-control study of nursing home residents with ADRD receiving hospice care, initiation of benzodiazepine or antipsychotic use was associated with increased 180-day mortality. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control Participants: 139,103 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The effects on depression and other outcomes were consistent with those observed for in-person programs, suggesting the viability of well-designed automated intervention. 2 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 274 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Longer follow-up and testing across diverse LEP communities are needed to assess diagnosis, treatment initiation, and caregiver trajectories. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT Participants: 287 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics and in outcome variables (HHI, GSES, and SF-12v2 mental component score and physical component score) between users and nonusers. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 101 Evidence: high
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.
- Caring for residents with dementia during a COVID‐19 outbreak in a long‐term care home
- Living with dementia: increased level of caregiver stress in times of COVID-19
- A systematic review of barriers and facilitators to and interventions for proxy decision-making by family carers of people with dementia
- The impact of the quality of relationship on the experiences and wellbeing of caregivers of people with dementia: a systematic review
- Sex and gender differences in caregiving burden experienced by family caregivers of persons with dementia: A systematic review
- Recording care time in nursing homes: development and validation of the "RUD-FOCA" (Resource Utilization in Dementia-Formal Care)
- Continuity of Care and Health Care Utilization in Older Adults With Dementia in Fee-for-Service Medicare
- Contrasting Approaches in Advance Care Planning in Dementia as Perceived by General Practitioners
- Multidisciplinary Home-Based Palliative Care for People Living with Dementia: Preliminary Findings on Palliative Care Concerns and Caregiver Burden
- Unravelling positive aspects of caregiving in dementia: An integrative review of research literature
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 →