Four major themes emerged: Methods of Support, Cultural Expectations and Varying Family Contributions, Lack of Self-Care, and Awareness. 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
This study aimed to explore racial/ethnic differences in the attitudes toward Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and dementia caregiving among midlife women who were family caregivers of persons living with AD (MWPLAD) in the U.S. and examine the associations of the attitudes to their health outcomes. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
To determine the impact of dementia on the family, we interviewed the primary care givers of 55 patients suffering from an irreversible dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 55 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
PLWD and carers need to receive specific practical and psychological support during the pandemic to support their well-being, which is severely affected by public health restrictions. 2 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Caregivers in the combined family therapy and technology intervention experienced a significant reduction in depressive symptoms at 6 months. 4 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The friendship subset of social networks was significantly related to cognition (independent of age, gender, depression, loneliness, and family subset of social network): B = 0.284, P = 0.01. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The relationships between caregiver burden as measured with the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers-short form and 6 characteristics of caregivers caring for patients with dementia were investigated for caregivers from England (n = 36), Finland (n = 42), and Greece (n = 46) using survey data. 1 key finding →
Participants: 36 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
NPS frequency varied from 18% for appetite and/or eating changes to 42% for delusions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Testing interventions in real-world settings requires fidelity monitoring to ensure implementation integrity. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Over 20% of caregivers reported high levels of care-related emotional difficulty. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
46/100
Self-compassion was found to be negatively related to caregiver burden and dysfunctional coping strategies and positively related to emotion-focused coping strategies. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Mean Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) score increased significantly between carers of PD-N (M = 13.39, SD = 12.22) compared to those of PD-MCI patients (M = 22.00, SD = 10.8), and between carers of PD-MCI and PDD patients (M = 29.33, SD = 9.59). 5 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Tele-STAR reduced caregiver burden and retained good program and treatment fidelity to STAR-C. We found Tele-STAR reduced caregiver burden and had good fidelity to the original protocol. 4 key findings →
Participants: 13 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
46/100
Dementia care, both at EOL and not at EOL, was associated with the most caregiver burden relative to regular care. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Both members of the dyad rated the PWD, on average, as being "somewhat involved". 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The nature and outcome of family caregiving is different for various racial and ethnic groups. 1 key finding →
Participants: 26 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Screen for Caregiver Burden (SCB) is a measure designed to identify distressing caregiver experiences rapidly. 1 key finding →
Participants: 191 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is a growing global concern, with informal caregivers, typically unpaid family members or friends, providing essential support to those living with the condition. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It appears that changes in the patients' behavior and in the interpersonal relations between caregivers and patients are associated with caregiver depression. 4 key findings →
Participants: 94 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Informal caregivers in the multicultural memory clinic cohort experienced a high level of caregiver burden (mean CSI-score multicultural cohort: 6.1 [SD: 3.3]; mean CSI-score native Dutch cohort: 4.8 [SD: 3.2]). 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study examined the perception of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and caregiving among family caregivers of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD in China. 1 key finding →
Participants: 38 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The level of agreement with dysfunctional thought statements from the Dementia Thoughts Caregivers Questionnaire and Thoughts Questionnaire was low. 5 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The association between Alzheimer caregiving and natural killer (NK) cell activity and basal plasma levels of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), cortisol, beta-endorphin, prolactin, epinephrine, norepinephrine, and neuropeptide Y was determined in 100 spousal Alzheimer caregivers and 33 age- and gender-comparable control volunteers upon intake into a study of the psychological and physiologic impact of caregiving. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The purpose of this study is to compare demographic and clinical characteristics of caregivers and care recipients by caregiver type (i.e., daughter, son, daughter-in-law, and spouse) and to compare the caregiver burden among each type of caregiver. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Groups of spouse (N = 285) and adult child (N = 244) caregivers of elderly parents suffering from Alzheimer's disease were interviewed regarding their caregiving behaviors, evaluations of caregiving, and general psychological well-being. 1 key finding →
Participants: 285 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
From across this tag
7 of the 195 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 7. The same 7 appear here every time.
- Needs analysis of family caregivers of people living with dementia in Sleman Regency, Yogyakarta
- Relation among Caregivers' Burden, Abuse and Behavioural Disorder in People with Dementia
- Fear of Incompetence in Family Caregivers and Dementia Care Transitions
- Dyadic construction of dementia: meta-ethnography and behaviour-process synthesis
- Concept Analysis: Alzheimer's Caregiver Stress
- Interprofessional collaboration in palliative dementia care through the eyes of informal caregivers
- Dementia and communication comorbidities within the context of caregiver support systems: a scoping review
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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →