27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
It is difficult to define what constitutes high-quality end-of-life care for people with dementia from the perspective of family carers. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Studies have found no evidence that feeding tubes in this population prevent aspiration, prolong life, improve overall function, or reduce pressure sores. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Approaches to palliative care that were originally developed for people with cancer are now being adopted for people with dementia, as a response to many reports of poor-quality care for people with dementia at the end of life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These are not problems distinct to palliative care, but they may have different origins and explanations compared to other areas of health care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Medicare hospice benefit was originally designed around a cancer disease paradigm but increasingly serves people living with dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia, with a high incidence rate, fast-developing syndrome and large disease burden, raises challenges to global health and social systems. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Even among patients with early cognitive impairment seen in specialty clinics and their caregivers, most were unaware of the decisions they could face, and there were many barriers to planning for these decisions. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The ongoing change in long-term care from institutional care to housing services causes major challenges to the continuity of end-of-life care. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results of the study identified that professionals across Europe have different opinions regarding the time point when to consider a person with dementia in need of palliative care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
For people with dementia living and dying in care homes, EoL interventions need to provide strategies that can accommodate or "hold" the inevitable and often unresolvable uncertainties of providing and receiving care in these settings. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In this article we aim to present these recommendations and to invite professionals to consider these important issues and to contribute towards a broader discussion. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Four broad areas were identified as requiring complex decisions at the end of life; 1) eating/swallowing difficulties, 2) agitation/restlessness, 3) ending life-sustaining treatment, and 4) providing "routine care" at the end of life. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Over 40% of US NH decedents have mild-to-moderately severe or advanced dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The aim of the present study was to clarify the processes of decision making and end-of-life care for patients with dementia in the group homes in Japan. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
International experts selected a set of 23 QIs for the organisation of palliative care. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, recent data suggest that the risk of adverse effects may offset the benefits of atypical agents in patients with dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This collaboratively developed, person-centred model can support the design of new education and training tools and be readily translated into existing programmes. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Using a knowledge-translation framework, information and strategies can be provided to family and professional caregivers to help them optimize residual memory and communication in people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A group of clinicians with extensive experience in dealing with dementia patients developed by consensus the Quality of Life in Dementia Scale (QUALID), an 11-item scale. 4 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In 2016, there were 1,005,781 Medicare Advantage and fee-for-service long-term residents. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We found notable differences in socio‐demographic and clinical characteristics, and utilization patterns in the year prior to death between decedents with dementia who were hospitalized in the last 30 days of life vs. those who were not. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,299 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
These findings suggest that moving to an AL influences Medicare enrollment decisions; and, variation in switching exists between the type of AL (general vs memory care) and whether or not an individual has dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 63,395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
These findings suggest that moving to an AL influences Medicare enrollment decisions; and, variation in switching exists between the type of AL (general vs memory care) and whether or not an individual has dementia. 4 key findings →
Participants: 63,395 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (AD/ADRD) are progressive neurodegenerative conditions that impair memory, thought processes, and functioning. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified two main themes (each with subthemes) that influence Latino dementia caregiver experiences with healthcare: (1) caregiving and understanding of dementia shaped by individual, family, and social factors (subthemes: Caregiver's own understanding of dementia; Lack of support and understanding from family; Latino cultural perspectives on dementia); and (2) navigating formal services amid gaps in cultural alignment and support (subthemes: Trial and error: education and resource gaps; Cultural tension with healthcare). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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.
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
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.
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.
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 →