27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
There is very little documented evidence on the experiences of healthcare professionals caring for their own family outside of their role. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The analysis reveals a significant acceleration in research activity after 2017. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Patients and their caregivers and families confronting dementia often face heavy burdens from difficult-to-control symptoms, uncertainty about the future, and a high risk of care partner burnout. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This paper examined the prevalence of and risk factors associated with unmet needs for activities of daily living (ADL) for older adults dying with dementia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
1 in 3 older adults die with or from dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Providing end-of-life care for patients with COPD, dementia, and cancer involves a focus on symptom management, integration of palliative care, and respecting patient preferences, while engaging families in the care process. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia-specific ACP/AD require a relational, flexible and ethically grounded approach that evolves with the individual’s condition. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Advance care planning aims to allow individuals to discuss their goals and preferences for future medical and nursing care with family members and medical personnel in advance when they still have decision-making ability, so that individuals can receive medical care that meets their preferences when they lose their decision-making ability. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Riverside Health has developed a new palliative care pathway to serve as an innovative standard of person-centered care for persons living with dementia (PLWD) and their care partners. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Dementia is a progressive condition that gradually impairs cognitive function, memory, and daily living skills. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Otępienie to zespół objawów wywołany postępującymi chorobami neurodegeneracyjnymi mózgu, które prowadzą do znacznego pogorszenia funkcji poznawczych, a w końcowym etapie do całkowitej zależności pacjenta od otoczenia. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In this study, a preliminary reliability assessment on the Chinese version of the EOLD scale was conducted, revealing that the three subscales exhibit strong internal consistency in reliability and structural validity. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Current processes for identifying hospice-eligible residents rely on regular assessments and interdisciplinary collaboration but reveal significant gaps, including delays in referrals and inconsistent practices. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Dementia is a life-limiting condition and a leading cause of death in the UK and globally. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Phase 1 (realist review; 86 papers) identified that a key intervention component was the activities enabling the development of moments of connection. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial Participants: 32 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among adults with ADRD, high SDM was associated with greater ACP prevalence in unadjusted analyses, although the fully adjusted association was not statistically significant. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,635 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Two analytical themes were identified: (1) challenges in preserving the person's voice throughout the dementia trajectory, reflecting a shift toward caregiver-mediated decision-making, assumptions about capacity, and delayed ACP initiation; and (2) challenges in maintaining continuity of expressed values and preferences over time, reflecting uncertainty about future care needs and the limitations of one-time ACP conversations. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) underscores the need for care models that preserve identity, autonomy, and comfort throughout disease progression. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
After more than three decades of intensive research, Alzheimer disease care remains largely palliative, and the field has drawn sustained criticism, both for that reason and for pursuing some directions of inquiry over others. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found that 75% of participants would choose for their life to end in the early stages of ADRD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,015 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 2144 participants (540 deaths over a median 4.4 years of survivor follow-up; 25% mortality), the seven-marker score plus age and sex achieved an apparent C of 0.74 (optimism-corrected 0.74), versus 0.68 for age and sex alone (Δ ≈ 0.06); the blood panel alone reached C 0.72. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,144 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The SPICT-TR is a culturally adapted, valid, and reliable assessment tool for identifying patients with palliative care needs within the Turkish healthcare system. 4 key findings →
Participants: 356 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We examined how often each diagnosed disease appeared on the certificate, its location and selection as the UCD, factors associated with its appearance (logistic regression), disease-specific mortality (multiple decrement life tables), and disease associations (Cause of Death Association Indicator, CDAI). 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data collection started on June 3, 2026, and is planned to close on June 30, 2026. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We included 23 studies with qualitative (73.9%) or quantitative/mixed-methods (26.1%) designs. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 23 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
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.
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.
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 →