Dementia is a common, devastating, and ultimately fatal illness. 4 key findings →
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.
The concepts of compassion, kindness and humanity in dementia care are discussed within the paper. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results indicated that patient diagnosis (cancer or dementia) and caregiver appraisals (stressfulness of functional impairment and positive aspects of caregiving) were not predictors on any of our well-being outcomes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
Little is known of the palliative care needs and experiences of older adults. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
One in three adults over the age of 60 years will die with dementia. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The findings from this survey indicate that cholinesterase inhibitors and/or NMDA receptor antagonists are prescribed for a subset of patients with advanced dementia and that a proportion of hospice medical directors report clinical benefit from the ongoing use of these agents. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Factor analysis of the Caregiver Strain Index revealed three dimensions of strain (role, personal, and emotional) related to caregiving. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advance care planning can be facilitated with the family caregiver in the context of everyday practice within the nursing home environment for older people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The most commonly encountered clinical conditions presenting with cognitive failure (CF) are delirium, dementia and amnestic disorders. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We noted no differences between decedents with and without dementia in terms of pain, psychosocial status, family involvement, advance care planning, most life-prolonging interventions, and hospice use. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A lower level of nursing support managed to sustain and build on the initial outcomes. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Goals The physicians' decision-making process in terminal care is complex: medical, ethical, legal and psychological aspects are all involved, particularly in critical situations. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Challenges in the diagnosis and classification of delirium in people with advanced disease are compounded by the generalized disturbance of central nervous system function that occurs in the seriously ill, often with comorbid illness, including dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The early integration of specialist palliative care has been shown to benefit the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The mapping system appears useful from a nurse manager's standpoint for exploring the dementia care pathway. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Further findings are organized according to the existential life worlds. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The goals of palliative care address critical issues for individuals with complex and serious illness residing in nursing homes, including pain and symptom management, communication, preparation for death, decisions about treatment preferences, and caregiver support. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Palliative care aims to improve the quality of life of patients and their families affected by life-threatening illness. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Each vignette promoted discussion of differences of perspectives about the ways to enhance the dignity of people with dementia in hospital, care home and community settings. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is a progressive terminal disease. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
Our results help to elucidate the tasks and roles required of FPs to make integration of a palliative care approach into the care continuum possible. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The experience of being a carer of a person with dementia at the end of life is expressed in these 12 accounts. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with dementia receive suboptimal palliative care, and this patient group is at risk to have pain at the end of life. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Concerning pain assessment, the findings of this review suggest that self-report pain rating scales, in particular the Verbal Rating Scale, the Horizontal Visual Analogue Scale and the Faces Pain Scale can be administered to patients in a more advanced stage of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Physicians should consider advanced dementia as a terminal disease for which there is a continuum of care that goes from palliative care with life-extending measures to symptomatic interventions only. 5 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 →