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 1–25 of 25 studies in Digital health tools published 2012 · 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.

Derivation and validation of automated electronic search strategies to extract Charlson comorbidities from electronic medical records

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100. Mayo Clinic proceedings 2012-09-01

Our results suggest that search strategies that use automated electronic search strategies to extract Charlson comorbidities from the clinical notes contained within the electronic medical record are feasible and reliable. 3 key findings →

Design: cohort study Participants: 1,447 Evidence: moderate

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

Contribution of individual diseases to death in older adults with multiple diseases

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2012-06-26

The use of methods that focus on determining a single underlying cause may lead to underestimation of the extent of the contribution of some diseases such as dementia and respiratory disease to death in older adults and overestimation of the contribution of other diseases. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Disturbance of emotion processing in frontotemporal dementia: a synthesis of cognitive and neuroimaging findings

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 52 out of 100. Neuropsychology review 2012-05-11

Accurate processing of emotional information is a critical component of appropriate social interactions and interpersonal relationships. 1 key finding →

Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Neuropathologically defined subtypes of Alzheimer's disease differ significantly from neurofibrillary tangle-predominant dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100. Acta neuropathologica 2012-09-12

Alzheimer's disease (AD) can be classified based on the relative density of neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in the hippocampus and association cortices into three subtypes: typical AD, hippocampal-sparing AD (HpSp AD), and limbic-predominant AD (LP AD). 4 key findings →

Participants: 18 Evidence: low

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

Ten year survival and outcomes in a prospective cohort of new onset Chinese Parkinson's disease patients

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry 2012-02-22

10 years into PD, a significant proportion of patients developed dopa resistant motor and non-motor features. 3 key findings →

Evidence: moderate

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

Usability of a new electronic assistive device for community-dwelling persons with mild dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 46 out of 100. Aging & mental health 2012-02-24

With the suggested adaptations, the CDN is expected to be a useful tool for supporting community-dwelling persons with mild dementia and their carers. 1 key finding →

Participants: 12 Evidence: low

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

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration: epidemiology, pathology, diagnosis and management

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 43 out of 100. CNS drugs 2012-10-01

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) describes a spectrum of clinically, pathologically and genetically heterogeneous neurodegenerative disorders of unknown aetiology. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Progressive supranuclear palsy presenting as primary lateral sclerosis but lacking parkinsonism, gaze palsy, aphasia, or dementia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Journal of the neurological sciences 2012-09-29

We report an autopsy case of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) that clinically showed only slowly progressive and symmetric upper motor neuron syndrome over a disease course of 12 years. 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

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

Prefrontal cortex rTMS enhances action naming in progressive non-fluent aphasia

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. European journal of neurology 2012-03-21

Our study demonstrated that rTMS improved action naming in subjects with PNFA, possibly due to the modulation of DLPFC pathways and a facilitation effect on lexical retrieval processes. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

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

Excess costs of dementia disorders and the role of age and gender - an analysis of German health and long-term care insurance claims data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100. BMC health services research 2012-06-19

Dementia poses a substantial additional burden to the German social security system, with the long-term care sector being more seriously challenged than the health care sector. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Automated classification of primary progressive aphasia subtypes from narrative speech transcripts

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior 2012-12-21

In the early stages of neurodegenerative disorders, individuals may exhibit a decline in language abilities that is difficult to quantify with standardized tests. 2 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Spatial navigation in normal aging and the prodromal stage of Alzheimer's disease: insights from imaging and behavioral studies

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Ageing research reviews 2012-07-05

Normal aging and mild Alzheimer's disease (AD) are associated with declines in navigational skills, including allocentric and egocentric representations, cognitive mapping, landmark processing, and spatial memory. 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

Abnormal network connectivity in frontotemporal dementia: evidence for prefrontal isolation

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 36 out of 100. Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior 2012-09-24

The present findings support a theory of FTD as a disorder of frontolimbic disconnection leading to unconstrained prefrontal connectivity. 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source

↑ 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