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

31,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 1–21 of 21 studies in Caregiving with an author at University of Pennsylvania (US) · 31,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of these 21 studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

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

Other subjects

Authors

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

Other institutions

From OpenAlex; 16,851 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Caregiving” covers

Caregiving — Research on the people doing the caring: their health, their workload, and what support actually helps.

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.

Trends in the prevalence and mortality of cognitive impairment in the United States: is there evidence of a compression of cognitive morbidity?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2008-03-04

Societal investment in building and maintaining cognitive reserve through formal education in childhood and continued cognitive stimulation during work and leisure in adulthood might help limit the burden of dementia among the growing number of older adults worldwide. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 7,406 Evidence: moderate

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

Sequential distribution of pTDP-43 pathology in behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2014-01-10

We examined regional distribution patterns of phosphorylated 43-kDa TAR DNA-binding protein (pTDP-43) intraneuronal inclusions in frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). 1 key finding →

Participants: 39 Evidence: low

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

The relationship between cerebral Alzheimer's disease pathology and odour identification in old age

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry 2006-09-29

The results suggest that difficulty in identifying familiar odours in old age is partly due to the accumulation of neurofibrillar pathology in central olfactory regions. 2 key findings →

Participants: 166 Evidence: low

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

Pathological combinations in neurodegenerative disease are heterogeneous and disease-associated

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2023-06-01

The presence of multiple additive pathologies associated with older age, increasing disease duration, APOE e4 allele and presence of dementia across the clinical groups. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

C9orf72 poly(GR) aggregation induces TDP-43 proteinopathy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Science translational medicine 2020-09-01

TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP-43) inclusions are a pathological hallmark of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), including cases caused by G 4 C 2 repeat expansions in the C9orf72 gene (c9FTD/ALS). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Trends in Home Health Care Among Traditional Medicare Beneficiaries With or Without Dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. JAMA Network Open 2025-05-16

Among the 13 604 086 traditional Medicare beneficiaries included in the study (mean [SD] age, 79.4 [7.7] years; 60.4% women), 27.7% had a diagnosis of dementia. 5 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low

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

Amyloid-Beta (Aβ) Plaques Promote Seeding and Spreading of Alpha-Synuclein and Tau in a Mouse Model of Lewy Body Disorders with Aβ Pathology

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neuron 2019-11-20

Studies have shown an overlap of Aβ plaques, tau tangles, and α-synuclein (α-syn) pathologies in the brains of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Parkinson's disease (PD) with dementia (PDD) patients, with increased pathological burden correlating with severity of cognitive and motor symptoms. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Diabetes is related to cerebral infarction but not to AD pathology in older persons

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100. Neurology 2006-12-01

Subjects were 233 older Catholic clergy in the Religious Orders Study, who underwent detailed annual evaluations, including neuropsychological testing, and brain autopsy at time of death (mean age 86 years, 45% men). 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The Contribution of Tau, Amyloid-Beta and Alpha-Synuclein Pathology to Dementia in Lewy Body Disorders

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Journal of Alzheimer's disease & Parkinsonism 2018-08-10

The majority of patients with Parkinson's Disease develop Dementia (PDD) in late stages of the disease and have widespread neocortical distribution of alpha-synuclein pathology at autopsy, compared with PD without dementia, in which neocortical synuclein pathology is less prevalent. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The National Dementia Workforce Study: Methods for Surveying Community Clinicians Who Provide Care to People With Dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 44 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2025-08-08

People with dementia have complex medical, functional, and social needs and experience highly variable care quality and outcomes across the U.S. health care system. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Understanding Digital Literacy of Persons With Dementia and Their Caregivers: A Scoping Review and an Evolutionary Concept Analysis of Empirical Studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Journal of Applied Gerontology 2025-06-19

This study constitutes both a scoping review and a concept analysis, as it systematically examines digital literacy across settings (home, assisted living facilities, and other long-term care facilities) in the context of persons with dementia and their caregivers. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Performance of the dementia severity rating scale: a caregiver questionnaire for rating severity in Alzheimer disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. Alzheimer disease and associated disorders 1996-01-01

The Dementia Severity Rating Scale (DSRS) is an informant-based, multiple-choice questionnaire that assesses severity from the mildest to the most severe stages in the major functional and cognitive domains affected in Alzheimer disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Challenges and Opportunities in Implementing a Multicomponent Dementia Caregiver Program in a Complex Healthcare System

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. INQUIRY The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing 2025-03-12

The Tailored Activity Program (TAP), an intervention for people living with dementia (PLWD) and their caregivers, has been shown to reduce behavioral symptoms for PLWD and caregiver burden. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

↑ 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 31,380 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 31,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (65.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (16.2%), 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.

1,048 records (3.3% of the library) are not peer-reviewed — 973 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    Where this research is being discussed: events