52.7% of dementia caregivers in the United States experience financial toxicity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
A multidimensional social exposome (MSE)-the combined lifespan measures of education, food insecurity, financial status, access to healthcare, childhood experiences, and more-may shape dementia risk and brain health over the lifespan, particularly in underserved regions like Latin America. 1 key finding →
Participants: 2,211 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Despite methodological inconsistency, supporting caregivers appears to be an effective strategy often improving well-being of caregiver or care-recipient and resulting in additional benefits for society. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 8976 decedents (mean [SD] age, 81.3 [8.6] years; 4927 women [55.1%] women) in the cohort, 2197 (22.5%) were included in the low wealth category, 4534 (50.5%) in the medium wealth category, and 2245 (27.1%) in the high wealth category. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
53/100
As ADRD deaths at home increase, the need for caregiver support and home-based palliative care may become more critical. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
By 2060, ADRD cases in China are projected to reach approximately 49.89 million, with the highest prevalence and economic burden concentrated in provinces such as Shandong, Sichuan, Jiangsu, Henan, and Guangdong. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Only a minority of subjects initiated ACP. 3 key findings →
Participants: 127 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
45/100
Surprisingly, compared to White female caregivers, all the other groups were 37% (95% CI 0.41-0.95) to 71% (95% CI 0.15-0.56) less likely to have emotional burden. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Using data from South Korea’s 2018 teleconsultation pilot program involving 1232 patients, the analysis revealed that teleconsultation reduced societal costs per consultation by USD 7.92 for chronic diseases, USD 27.30 for dementia care, and USD 9.61 for rehabilitation. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,232 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
China's population has rapidly aged over the recent decades of social and economic development as neurodegenerative disorders have proliferated, especially Alzheimer's disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults classified with dementia were more likely to drop out of the labor force and become poor than similar older adults without dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We compared black (n = 33) and white (n = 119) caregivers of dementia patients on indices of adaptation, adjustment, and utilization of supportive services. 3 key findings →
Participants: 33 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Targeted interventions, as enhanced training and improved support systems, are essential to address these disparities and better support GPs. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 789 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Hispanics and Asians diagnosed with dementia had 40% lower mortality risk and African Americans had 13% lower mortality risk than Whites. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data point to cultural, socioeconomic and systemic barriers to accessing quality EOL care for PLWD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 29 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The study included seven healthcare workers, five participants with dementia and their caregivers, and 10 persons without dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →