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

27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 26–50 of 59 studies in Digital health tools published 2022 (page 2 of 3) · 27,380 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

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.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 12,859 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

What “Digital health tools” covers

Digital health tools — Apps, wearables, online tests and other technology used to detect, monitor or support people with dementia.

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.

Global neuropathologic severity of Alzheimer's disease and locus coeruleus vulnerability influences plasma phosphorylated tau levels

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100. Molecular neurodegeneration 2022-12-27

Higher soluble plasma p-tau levels may be the result of an intersection between insoluble deposits of amyloid-β and tau accumulation in brain, and may be associated with locus coeruleus degeneration. 3 key findings →

Participants: 35 Evidence: low

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

Early dementia diagnosis, MCI-to-dementia risk prediction, and the role of machine learning methods for feature extraction from integrated biomarkers, in particular for EEG signal analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2022-04-07

On clinical data, this innovative approach for early diagnosis might provide more insight into pathophysiological processes underlying degenerative changes, as well as toward a personalized risk evaluation for pharmacological, nonpharmacological, and rehabilitation treatments. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Rapid Biomarker Screening of Alzheimer's Disease by Interpretable Machine Learning and Graphene-Assisted Raman Spectroscopy

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 49 out of 100. ACS nano 2022-03-25

The study of Alzheimer's disease (AD), the most common cause of dementia, faces challenges in terms of understanding the cause, monitoring the pathogenesis, and developing early diagnoses and effective treatments. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Association between hearing loss and development of dementia using formal behavioural audiometric testing within the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA): a prospective population-based study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. The lancet. Healthy longevity 2022-11-18

After adjusting for sex, years of education, smoking status, diabetes, hypertension, apolipoprotein E ε4 carriership, and hearing rehabilitation (defined as hearing aid or cochlear implant use), neither PTA (hazard ratio [HR] per 10-decibels hearing level increase of 0·99 (95% CI 0·89-1·12; p=0·91) nor WRS (HR per 10% decrease of 0·98, 95% CI 0·89-1 ·07; p=0·65) was significantly associated with the development of dementia. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Principles and philosophies for speech and language therapists working with people with primary progressive aphasia: an international expert consensus

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Disability and rehabilitation 2022-03-30

This study describes the philosophy of expert practice and outlines a set of best practice principles when working with people with PPA.Implications for rehabilitationPrimary progressive aphasia (PPA) describes a group of language led dementias which deteriorate inexorably over time. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The use of digital technologies by people with mild-to-moderate dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic: A positive technology perspective

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Dementia (London, England) 2022-03-25

A growing body of research has shown that people with dementia are using digital technologies to enhance lived experience. 1 key finding →

Participants: 19 Evidence: low

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

Quantitative detection of α-Synuclein and Tau oligomers and other aggregates by digital single particle counting

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. NPJ Parkinson's disease 2022-06-02

The pathological hallmark of neurodegenerative diseases is the formation of toxic oligomers by proteins such as alpha-synuclein (aSyn) or microtubule-associated protein tau (Tau). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Multi-feature computational framework for combined signatures of dementia in underrepresented settings

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 48 out of 100. Journal of neural engineering 2022-08-25

The model accurately identified dementia subtypes using measures readily available in underrepresented settings, with a similar performance than advanced biomarkers. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Applications of artificial intelligence to aid early detection of dementia: A scoping review on current capabilities and future directions

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Journal of biomedical informatics 2022-02-17

Seventy percent of cases are due to Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology and there is a 10-20 year 'pre-clinical' period before significant cognitive decline occurs. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Improving generalizability and study design of Alzheimer's disease cohort studies in the United States by including under-represented populations

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 47 out of 100. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 2022-11-13

The poor generalizability of clinical research data due to the enrollment of highly educated, non-Latinx White participants hampers the development of therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Effect of a Digital Literacy Program on Older Adults' Digital Social Behavior: A Quasi-Experimental Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100. International journal of environmental research and public health 2022-09-29

In South Korea, digital literacy education programs are expected to help its older population participate in online welfare services to increase their social support, self-esteem and well-being. 4 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 27,380 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 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.

1,032 records (3.8% 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