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 126–150 of 1,094 studies in Digital health tools (page 6 of 44) · 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.

Cardiometabolic risk factors associated with brain age and accelerate brain ageing

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Human brain mapping 2021-10-09

The structure and integrity of the ageing brain is interchangeably linked to physical health, and cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRs) are associated with dementia and other brain disorders. 4 key findings →

Design: cross-sectional Evidence: high

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

Predicting behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia with pattern classification in multi-center structural MRI data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. NeuroImage. Clinical 2017-02-06

Our study demonstrates that MRI, a widespread imaging technology, can individually identify bvFTD with high accuracy in multi-center imaging data, paving the road to personalized diagnostic approaches in the future. 2 key findings →

Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high

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

Brain structure and phenotypic profile of superagers compared with age-matched older adults: a longitudinal analysis from the Vallecas Project

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. The lancet. Healthy longevity 2023-07-13

We aimed to characterise the brain structure of superagers and identify demographic, lifestyle, and clinical factors associated with this phenotype. 4 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 64 Evidence: moderate

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

Characterizing the Clinical Features and Atrophy Patterns of MAPT-Related Frontotemporal Dementia With Disease Progression Modeling

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Neurology 2021-06-22

Our results demonstrate that different MAPT mutations give rise to distinct atrophy patterns and clinical phenotype, providing insights into the underlying disease biology and potential utility for patient stratification in therapeutic trials. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate

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

Brain properties predict proximity to symptom onset in sporadic Alzheimer's disease

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2018-06-01

Within the training set, individuals closer to or beyond their parent's symptom onset demonstrated reduced grey matter volume and altered functional connectivity, specifically in regions known to be vulnerable in Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Participants: 138 Evidence: moderate

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

Can Use of Digital Technologies by People with Dementia Improve Self-Management and Social Participation? A Systematic Review of Effect Studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Journal of clinical medicine 2021-02-05

There is increasing interest in the use of technology to support social health in dementia. 5 key findings →

Design: systematic review Evidence: high

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

A Risk Prediction Model Based on Machine Learning for Cognitive Impairment Among Chinese Community-Dwelling Elderly People With Normal Cognition: Development and Validation Study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Journal of medical Internet research 2021-02-24

This simple and feasible cognitive impairment prediction model could identify community-dwelling elderly people at the greatest 3-year risk for cognitive impairment, which could help community nurses in the early identification of dementia. 1 key finding →

Design: prospective cohort Evidence: moderate

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

A systematic literature review of automatic Alzheimer's disease detection from speech and language

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA 2020-11-01

The systematic literature review supported the argument that language and speech could successfully be used to detect dementia automatically. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

The effect of digital reminiscence therapy on people with dementia: a pilot randomized controlled trial

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. BMC geriatrics 2020-05-06

Digital RT proved an innovative approach to manage PWD and will thus help PWD achieve a better mood and have more opportunities to engage in social interactions. 3 key findings →

Participants: 25 Evidence: low

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

Artificial Intelligence in Health Care: Bibliometric Analysis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. Journal of medical Internet research 2020-07-29

This analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the AI-related research conducted in the field of health care, which helps researchers, policy makers, and practitioners better understand the development of health care-related AI research and possible practice implications. 2 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Multimorbidity and long-term care dependency--a five-year follow-up

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100. BMC geriatrics 2014-05-28

The results should form the basis for future health policy decisions on the treatment of patients with multiple chronic diseases and also show the need to introduce new ways of providing long-term care to this population. 3 key findings →

Participants: 115,203 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Recalibrating the epigenetic clock: implications for assessing biological age in the human cortex

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Brain : a journal of neurology 2020-12-01

Human DNA methylation data have been used to develop biomarkers of ageing, referred to as 'epigenetic clocks', which have been widely used to identify differences between chronological age and biological age in health and disease including neurodegeneration, dementia and other brain phenotypes. 2 key findings →

Participants: 1,397 Evidence: low

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

Delirium symptoms in post-acute care: prevalent, persistent, and associated with poor functional recovery

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2003-01-01

The data from this study provide strong preliminary evidence that, in patients newly admitted to post-acute care facilities from acute care hospitals, delirium symptoms are prevalent, persistent, and associated with poor functional recovery. 4 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 551 Evidence: moderate

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

Clinical, neuroimaging, and pathologic features of progressive nonfluent aphasia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Annals of neurology 1996-02-01

We report the clinical, neuroimaging, and neuropathologic features of progressive nonfluent aphasia (PNFA), a rare neurodegenerative syndrome most notable for its distinct language disturbance. 3 key findings →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

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

↑ 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