Based on the perceptions of bereaved family members, important opportunities exist to improve decision-making in feeding tube insertion. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Dementia syndrome is common and expected to increase significantly among older people and characterized by the loss of cognitive, psychological and physical functions. 2 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among nursing home residents with advanced cognitive impairment admitted to acute care hospitals, for-profit ownership, larger hospital size, and greater ICU use was associated with increased rates of feeding tube insertion, even after adjusting for patient-level characteristics. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
41/100
Rapidly progressive dementia mimicking Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a relatively rare presentation but a rewarding one to become familiar with, as the potential diagnoses range from the universally fatal to the completely reversible. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The process of advance care planning in dementia is far from straightforward; as dementia progresses, the ability to consider future thoughts and actions becomes compromised, thus affecting decision-making abilities. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This paper will describe initiatives within the RHS frameworks of the National Health Group (NHG) and the Alexandra Health System (AHS) to forge a frailty-ready healthcare system across the spectrum, which includes the well healthy ("living well"), the well unhealthy ("living with illness"), the unwell unhealthy ("living with frailty"), and the end-of-life (EoL) ("dying well"). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ACP is facilitated by an open relationship based on trust between the GP, the person with dementia and his/her family caregiver, in which both medical and non-medical issues are addressed. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Ageing is an inevitable fundamental process for people and is their greatest risk factor for neurodegenerative disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The most common underlying causes of death among the 49,172 deceased nursing home residents were circulatory diseases (42.2%) and dementia (22.7%). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Healthcare assistants are frontline staff who have a key role in direct patient care, spending a considerable amount of time with patients in comparison to other health professionals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Frailty and sarcopenia have recently gained considerable attention in terms of preventive care in Japan, which has an ever-increasing aging population. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The findings indicate that healthcare professionals experienced several structural barriers that prevented the provision of palliative care to people with severe dementia in long-term care facilities. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study suggests that decision making at the end of life for people with dementia has the potential to be improved. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A mobile team that specializes in palliative care in dementia and supports professional and family caregivers is a promising model. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
End-of-life care for people with dementia does not differ from care throughout the dementia trajectory. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
GPs are identifying patients for anticipatory and palliative care more equitably across the different disease trajectories and earlier in the disease process than they were previously identifying patients specifically for palliative care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
41/100
Physicians often withhold potentially burdensome life-prolonging treatment in nursing home residents in all stages of dementia in the Netherlands. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) are common in dementia, although little is known about their prevalence and treatment near the end of life. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This unique study has confirmed the relevance of much of the content of existing end of life frameworks to dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The care experienced by people with dementia and their families has the potential to be improved; palliative care frameworks may have much to offer in this endeavour. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Interdisciplinary Care Leader role offers a promising method for supporting and improving end-of-life care discussions between families of people with advanced dementia and nursing home staff. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
41/100
Study results emphasize the need for improved EOL counseling in DLB, recognition of EOL symptoms, earlier hospice involvement, tailoring EOL care to DLB-specific needs, and clinician-family communication. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Integrated Memory Care Clinic (IMCC) is a patient-centered medical home as defined by the National Committee for Quality Assurance directed by advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) caring for persons living with dementia (PLWD); physicians provide specialty consultation but do not direct care or care planning. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although a high proportion of patients received elements of palliative care, transitions to a goal of comfort or hospice happened very near death. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review highlighted the main challenges associated with optimal ACP initiation with PwD. 2 key findings →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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 →