27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Many studies have examined factors associated with individuals of high or low healthcare spending in a given year. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 30,729 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A total of 2,098 MAPD patients meeting study inclusion/exclusion criteria and with a PA for alirocumab were identified between March 1, 2016 and February 28, 2017. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,730 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Additionally, it is unknown whether the benefits of this cap would vary between Medicare patients with type 1 versus type 2 diabetes. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 2,227,229 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Reliable information on rate of progression of cognitive impairment in probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) is important for evaluating possible beneficial effects of therapeutic agents and in planning long-term care for patients with this chronic illness. 1 key finding →
Participants: 430 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Assisted-living facilities (ALFs), which provide a community for residents who require assistance throughout their day, are an important part of the long-term-care system in the United States. 5 key findings →
Participants: 32 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Average time to complete DEMQOL-CH was <5 minutes. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The majority of RC/AL patients were taking five or more medications; 16.0% of these patients were receiving IPMs. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Neither assessment condition promoted significantly greater levels of consistency (i.e., the same preference rating at Time 1 and Time 2). 5 key findings →
Participants: 21 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Up to 7 August 2020, there were 29,542 (95% CI 25,176 to 33,908) excess deaths in all care homes. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants: 83 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among non-dually eligible beneficiaries, 9.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.0, 9.1) with ADRD disenrolled while 19.7% (95% CI: 19.6, 19.9) switched plans within MA compared to a disenrollment rate of 4.2% (95% CI: 4.2, 4.2) and switching rate of 22.8% (95% CI: 22.9, 22.8) for persons without ADRD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 145 342 adults met inclusion criteria; 10.5% had ADRD and were likely to be older, female, and have more comorbid conditions. 4 key findings →
Participants: 342 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The most important predictors of having a diagnosis of ADRD by the start of care OASIS assessment were a prior discharge diagnosis of ADRD among those admitted from an inpatient setting, and frequently exhibiting symptoms of confusion. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Individuals living with dementia often have limited capacity to express their care preferences at the final stage of life, and therefore, are at risk of receiving end-of-life care that may not align with their preferences.1 While most people prefer to be at home in their final days of life,2 research has shown that individuals with dementia are less likely to die in a home or community setting compared to those without dementia.3, 4 Studies also suggest that the percentage of individuals with dementia who died in a home or community setting has been increasing over time.5, 6 This study sought to update the literature by examining the association between dementia status and site of death, and by comparing the trends in site of death between decedents with and without dementia using recent national data. 5 key findings →
Participants: 813,213 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There were 75 subjects in the pilot. The patients were aged 65 (56-73.5) years, and 39% (29/75) resided in rural areas. 5 key findings →
Participants: 75 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among TM enrollees, prevalence of dementia was lower by 4% points in 2014 (9.0%, 95%CI: 7.8%, 9.3%) compared to 2000 (13.0%, 95%CI: 12%, 14%). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 18,381 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This benefit is being offered at no cost to eligible Medicare recipients; however, recent reports suggest that few persons are taking advantage of it (1–3) and who is using it is unclear. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Among 6158 person-waves with a claims-based dementia diagnosis from 3278 PWPD (3134 [50.9%] aged 65-84 years; 4282 [69.5%] female; 1176 [19.1%] non-Hispanic Black, 617 [10.0%] Hispanic, and 4256 [69.1%] non-Hispanic White), the adjusted proportion not reporting their diagnosis was 42% (95% CI, 40%-43%) among all respondents and 67% (95% CI, 64%-69%) among self-respondents. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In most of these nonacademic healthcare delivery systems, traditional randomized clinical trial designs to evaluate effectiveness are too rigid, too expensive, and take too long to achieve results. 5 key findings →
Participants: 75 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The possible mediating role of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the relationship between alcohol use disorders (AUD) and the risk of early-onset (<age 65) and late-onset (≥age 65) dementia lacks formal investigation. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We performed an observational analysis of prospectively collected data on 1,474 adult patients who were hospitalized for community-acquired pneumonia; 1,169 patients were under 80 years of age and 305 (21%) patients were over 80 years ("very elderly"). 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,169 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
388,899 deaths were included. Most people died in care homes (55.3%) or hospitals (39.6%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The Medicare annual wellness visit-a preventive care visit free to Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Part B-requires detection of cognitive impairment. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 5353 MA beneficiary observations (1239 [23.1%] aged 65-74 years; 3127 [58.4%] aged ≥75 years; 1785 male [33.3%]), 1629 (30.4%) reported a diagnosis of ADRD, and 3724 (69.6%) did not report an ADRD diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 738 MA and 1488 FFS participants, weighted mean age was 76 years (SD 7.0), 59% were female, and 9% had probable dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →