alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Research

27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 951–975 of 1,013 studies (page 39 of 41) · 27,780 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Showing 1,013 studies tagged planning — clear

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 13,259 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

Additional file 2 of Factors influencing readiness for advance care planning in dementia: a qualitative interview study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Figshare 2026-02-09

Appendix B. Coding tree of main categories and specific sub categories describing factors influencing readiness for advance care planning among people with dementia, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Additional file 1 of Factors influencing readiness for advance care planning in dementia: a qualitative interview study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Figshare 2026-02-09

Appendix A. Interview guides on experiences with advance care planning, factors influencing readiness for advance care planning, and the use of conversation aids among people with dementia, family caregivers, and healthcare professionals. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Palliative Care for Community-Dwelling Persons Living With Dementia: A Concept Analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2025-12-01

Antecedents of acute care use and poor prognosis may suggest late utilization of palliative care among PLWD and lack of palliative care needs screening. 1 key finding →

Participants: 16 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Care assistant experiences of dementia care in long-term nursing and residential care environments

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 32 out of 100. Dementia 2016-07-27

Care assistants have a unique insight into the lives of service users and those factors which may impede or enhance the delivery of high quality dementia oriented care. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Perspectives of Former Caregivers of Black Older Adults Living With Dementia on Advance Care Planning

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. Journal of Gerontological Nursing 2025-04-24

Future research should leverage perspectives of former caregivers to assist with improving outcomes for Black caregivers, thereby promoting health equity. [ Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 51 (6), 30–37.] 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Having Their Cake and Eating it Too: An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Study on the Dietary Behaviours of Family Carers of Persons With Dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. Dementia 2025-07-23

Family carers were food secure according to the FIES, and their overall diet quality was moderate, with a mean MEDAS score of 6.6 ± 2.1. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

End-of-life care of people with dementia in Latin America: A qualitative analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. Palliative Care and Social Practice 2025-12-01

Although there were differences between and within the countries, end-of-life care was often affected by the socioeconomic contexts, which represent barriers for access to healthcare services; under-tapped informal caregivers' potential; societal norms and cultural expectations around care and informal caregiving; the dementia-trajectory itself; and an inadequate assurance of policies, skilled workforce, and services. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Perceptions of Dementia Threats and Related Advance Care Planning among Adults in Central Vietnam

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. VNU Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 2026-06-01

Understanding dementia beliefs among Vietnamese people is crucial for the development of evidence-based interventions to promote positive help-seeking behaviors when facing the risk of dementia for themselves and their relatives. 3 key findings →

Participants: 300 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Assisted Living Staff Perspectives on End-Of-Life Care for Residents Living With Dementia: A Qualitative Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 31 out of 100. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® 2026-04-19

BackgroundAlzheimer's disease and related dementia (ADRD) affect nearly half of assisted living (AL) residents, the majority of whom have palliative care (PC) needs at the end of life (EOL). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Improving quality of life for institutionalized individuals with advanced dementia: A pilot study on efficacy of a semi-immersive virtual reality driving simulator for individuals with advanced dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Displays 2025-08-12

• A novel semi-immersive VR driving simulator (VRDS) for institutionalized older adults with advanced dementia. • The VRDS integrates realistic driving with a virtual environment to stimulate implicit memory and improve cognitive function. • Statistical analyses indicate improvements in game and mood scores over repeated sessions. • The system’s performance logging provides objective measures of implicit learning and motor adaptation in advanced dementia. • The logging system offers a practical alternative to standard cognitive assessments in advanced dementia. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Exploring advance care planning discourses in scottish dementia policies: A critical discourse analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 30 out of 100. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 2025-01-01

Advance Care Planning (ACP) is a continuous process that enables individuals to discuss and document their preferences for future care in the event of terminal illness or incapacitation. 2 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.

↑ Change the filters

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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed