38/100
Seven areas were identified as important to end-of-life care for people with dementia and/or family carers. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
'We DECide' had a positive influence on advance care planning policy. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There exists compelling evidence that advance care planning (ACP) remains a key factor in the delivery of appropriate end of life care and facilitates the timely transition to palliative care for people with dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Achieving pain management in practice was highly challenging. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This review highlights the need to integrate trauma-informed practices into hospice and palliative care. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
Despite increasing attention given to dementia by international governments and policy makers, the focus of end of life care has been on the dying trajectory of malignant disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This paper provides an overview of the evidence on the perspective of health care professionals (HCPs) in relation to advance care planning (ACP) for people with dementia, residing in long-term care settings. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults with cognitive impairment face many healthcare challenges, chief among them participating in medical decision-making about their own health care. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
End-of-life care policy in the UK states that all people should identify their needs, priorities and preferences for end-of-life care in the form of advance care planning. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In the advanced stages of illness, patients often face challenging decisions regarding their treatment and overall medical care. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We identified a consensus definition for serious illness in surgery. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
Providing palliative care for residents with dementia in long-term care (LTC) settings is problematic due to their declining verbal abilities and related challenges. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study assessed clinical, demographic, facility, and regional factors associated with documented do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders, feeding/medication/other treatment (FMT) restrictions, and living wills among nursing facility residents. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Palliative care services would benefit from ensuring holistic approaches to supporting people with dementia, their carers and wider family networks. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study consolidates evidence that commonly used signs and symptoms of dehydration lack even basic levels of diagnostic accuracy in older adults, implying that many who are dehydrated are not being identified, thus compromising their health and well-being. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, even though neurodegenerative dementia results in the gradual loss of decision-making capacity, ACP is still extremely rare. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Only one third (n = 10) of caregivers interviewed were prepared for the death, and the majority who were prepared were enrolled in hospice. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Many identified themes were consistent with published barriers to quality EOL care in dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite the increasing prevalence, growing costs, and high mortality of dementia in older adults in the U.S., little is known about the course of these diseases and what care dementia patients receive in their final years of life. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advance care planning before an acute event is only the first step in a process of decision making. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings reveal several different views on what is important about end-of-life care for people with dementia; therefore, a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to care is unlikely to be most appropriate. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research is needed with methodologically rigorous designs and theoretical frameworks that examine cognitive, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing ACP attitudes, preferences, and behaviors among PWDs in order to improve engagement among this population. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most importantly attributes included (1) knowing and recognizing the symptoms of decline in dementia and what dying looks like; (2) understanding emotions and grief responses; (3) accessing and appraising supports needed to manage and care for dying; (4) organizing affairs and completing tasks in advance; (5) accepting that losses are inevitable and imminent; (6) reflecting on caregiving and finding meaning, "a silver-lining"; and (7) closing, reconciling, and renewing relationship bonds and completing the family member's life. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The importance of better care integration is emphasized in many national dementia plans. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
About half of the caregivers had significant levels of psychological distress. 2 key findings →
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 27,380 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 →