Comparing two nationally representative surveys of older Americans 12 years apart, researchers found the share of seniors with dementia fell substantially, from 11.6% in 2000 to 8.8% in 2012. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 21,057
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Collaborative dementia care programs are effective in addressing the needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers. 3 key findings →
Participants: 780
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Persistent pain was associated with accelerated memory decline and increased probability of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Low daytime SBP was independently associated with a greater progression of cognitive decline in older patients with dementia and MCI among those treated with AHDs. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 172
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Program participants (n = 382 men, n = 701 women; mean [SD] age, 82.10 [7.90] years; age range 54-101 years) were less likely to be admitted to a long-term care facility (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.59-0.61) than those not participating in the dementia care program (n = 759 men, n = 1407 women; mean [SD] age, 82.42 [8.50] years; age range, 34-103 years). 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 382
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Beneficiaries with dementia who had lower levels of continuity of care were younger, had a higher income, and had more comorbid medical conditions. 3 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The sample included 3 329 977 beneficiaries (2 126 290 [63.9%] female, 33 887 [1.0%] Asian, 354 771 [10.7%] Black, 61 515 [1.8%] Hispanic, 2 831 391 [85.0%] White, and 891 815 [26.8%] dual eligible for Medicaid). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Although current prevention and treatment approaches to dementia have been less than optimally successful, substantial investments in dementia research will undoubtedly provide new answers to reducing the burden of dementia worldwide. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
During the 12-year follow-up period, 61 participants (7.8%) had a reported hypoglycemic event, and 148 (18.9%) developed dementia. 3 key findings →
Participants: 783
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Compared with 2000, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for the increase in NIV use was 2.63 (95% CI, 2.46-2.82; % receipt: 0.8% vs 2.0%) for 2005 and 11.84 (95% CI, 11.11-12.61; % receipt: 0.8% vs 7.1%) for 2017. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We also assessed the rates in patients with other significant medical, neurologic, or mental comorbid illness. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 652,378
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
This randomized clinical trial found that ADRD screening in PC was not associated with improvement in family member health-related quality of life, caregiver preparedness, or caregiving self-efficacy. 5 key findings →
Design: RCT
Participants: 1,808
Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among 57 753 decedents, approximately half of the patients with ESRD, cardiopulmonary failure, or frailty received palliative care consultations (adjusted proportions, 50.4%, 46.7%, and 43.7%, respectively) vs 73.5% of patients with cancer and 61.4% of patients with dementia (P Conclusions and relevance Family-reported quality of end-of-life care was significantly better for patients with cancer and those with dementia than for patients with ESRD, cardiopulmonary failure, or frailty, largely owing to higher rates of palliative care consultation and do-not-resuscitate orders and fewer deaths in the intensive care unit among patients with cancer and those with dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The cohort experienced 496 suspected infections; 72.4% were treated with antimicrobials, most commonly quinolones (39.8%) and third- or fourth-generation cephalosporins (20.6%). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Further, we do not know if ACP uptake is greater among those in worse health and with poorer prognoses. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Hearing loss is independently associated with accelerated cognitive decline and incident cognitive impairment in community-dwelling older adults. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,984
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A total of 2176 person living with dementia-caregiver dyads were enrolled; 1271 persons living with dementia (58.4%) and 1650 caregivers (75.8%) were female, and their mean (SD) age were 80.6 (8.5) years and 65.2 (12.3) years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,271
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The findings of this study suggest that concurrent with new initiatives aimed at reducing hospitalizations, hospital transfers declined between 2011 and 2017 among nursing home residents with advanced illnesses without increased mortality rates. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Alzheimer disease and related dementias were associated with adverse financial events years prior to clinical diagnosis that become more prevalent after diagnosis and were most common in lower-education census tracts. 4 key findings →
Participants: 81
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
This cohort study examines the use of cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine among older adults with dementia after admission into hospice care despite the medications’ limited clinical benefit following enrollment into hospice. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Of 5406 nursing home residents with advanced dementia, 2911 (53.9%) received at least 1 medication with questionable benefit (range, 44.7% in the Mid-Atlantic census region to 65.0% in the West South Central census region). 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The median age of participants was 79 years, 69% (31 of 45) were of non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity, and 60% (27 of 45) had attended at least some college. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
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.