Caregivers reported that digital mental health tools have an overall positive role in their health. 5 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.
57/100
Assistance with daily activities is crucial for persons living with dementia and functional limitations, yet many face substantial challenges in accessing adequate care and support. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The sample consisted predominantly of women (79% in the intervention group, 69% in the control group), with daughters forming the largest caregiver subgroup (66.6% and 52.4%, respectively). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 42 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
57/100
Ninety-one reviews provided evidence on the impact of telemedicine in dementia care. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 143 331 older adults with dementia (83 536 [58.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 83.8 [7.5] years), 1312 (0.9%) received a feeding tube in hospital and 142 019 (99.1%) did not. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Regular health status updates and end of life discussions can help families understand dementia progression and prepare for end of life. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Nurses play a key role in the effective management of pain through the use of pain assessment tools, behavioural observation, and analgesic choice. 2 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advance care planning (ACP) is increasingly acknowledged as a key step to enable patients to define their goals/preferences for future medical care, together with their carers and health professionals. 1 key finding →
Participants: 53 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this Delphi survey study, international experts reached consensus on a range of criteria for referral to specialist palliative care. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 60 Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recent evidence suggests that Web-based interventions have the potential to support caregivers by decreasing caregiver stress and burden. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The multi-sectoral collaborative care model proposed in this study integrated resources from several departments, effectively improved the quality of life of patients and their caregivers, and provided a way of care services for patients with Alzheimer Disease. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Study findings will reveal the feasibility of delivering an 8-week multidomain health education intervention for primary prevention of dementia in midlife and will provide preliminary evidence of mechanisms of change. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 20 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Healthcare providers identified caregivers in most of the sample, but less than 50% assessed their well-being and needs. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 211 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Tailoring activities to the capabilities of dementia patients and training families in activity use resulted in clinically relevant benefits for patients and caregivers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dependency upon others to perform ADL was the main factor affecting HRQoL. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 244 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Grief in dementia carers can be expected; however, those at risk of distressing anticipatory and complicated grief may be identified and targeted for intervention when necessary. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
A minority of NH residents with advanced dementia received hospice care. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Technology-based interventions have the potential to support informal caregivers of PWD. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The most crucial elements for the adoption of ATT in the future will be a focus on co-design, improved involvement of relevant stakeholders, and the adaptability (tailoring related to context) of ATT solutions over time (disease process). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The sample included 2 619 464 patients (mean [SD] age, 81.3 [8.6] years; 61% women; 87% were White; 8% were Black; 22% with ADRD). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 464 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This study presents findings from IDEA Café, for older adults aged 50 and older living with early dementia, dementia, Alzheimer’s Disease or cognitive impairment (ED/CI) with no informal caregiver or care partner. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 15 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Residents' QoL was negatively associated with advanced dementia, PDU, and NPS. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 207 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The ADRQL is a valid indicator of QOL in NH residents with advanced dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 119 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The original mortality risk score predicted 6-month mortality with reasonable accuracy in 2 validation cohorts of nursing home residents with advanced dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
CMS was likely cost-effective from the payer but not from a societal perspective, underlining the importance of informal care. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT Participants: 192 Evidence: moderate
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.
- Quality of end-of-life care among individuals with and without dementia: a Swedish registry-based study
- Dementia care management in primary care practices: a descriptive study among nurse practitioners
- End-of-life care for people with dementia from ethnic minority groups: a systematic review
- Emergency Departments Leading the Transformation of Alzheimer's and Dementia Care
- Caring for Aged Dementia Care Resident Study (CADRES) of person-centred care, dementia-care mapping, and usual care in dementia: a cluster-randomised trial
- A proactive approach to improve end-of-life care in a medical intensive care unit for patients with terminal dementia
- Advance care planning for people with dementia: a review
- Conditions for Nutritional Care of Elderly Individuals with Dementia and Their Caregivers: An Exploratory Study
- Additional file 2 of Factors influencing readiness for advance care planning in dementia: a qualitative interview study
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 →