A gap of knowledge, of information and in care intertwiningly hinder advance care planning. 2 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
We found that family satisfaction with care is related to a comfort care goal shortly after admission, but quality of dying did not. 5 key findings →
Participants: 148 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale for Dementia is a comprehensive and acceptable caregiver-reported measure to detect symptoms and problems in dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 21 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
People with advanced dementia in their final phase of life have a multitude of individual and complex needs. 2 key findings →
Participants: 25 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Four themes were found: sense of self, connection to others, acceptance versus resistance in the face of adversity, and orientation toward the future versus focus on the present. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We have provided the first definition of palliative care in dementia based on evidence and consensus, a framework to provide guidance for clinical practice, policy and research. 1 key finding →
Participants: 64 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study has identified the professional, organisational and legal factors that influence advance care planning implementation; professional training should target these specific areas. 2 key findings →
Participants: 95 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The current practice of palliative care in Belgium is far from the presently considered ideal palliative care approaches. 1 key finding →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Four themes were identified: Making the transition; Competence challenged; 'The long view' and Working together. 4 key findings →
Participants: 58 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advance care planning can assist patients to achieve a sense of control and 'peace of mind' and facilitates important family discussion. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite the fact that pain is the most common complaint at the end of life, pain management may be suboptimal for some primary diagnoses. 2 key findings →
Participants: 51 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Engagement in advance care planning might be hindered if it is too medicalized and exclusively patient-centered. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
There are palliative care validated instruments to assess the sedation effect but this review shows the need for a more standardized approach when assessing it. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
End-of-life care for people with dementia does not differ from care throughout the dementia trajectory. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
40/100
It is difficult to define what constitutes high-quality end-of-life care for people with dementia from the perspective of family carers. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This qualitative study about the experiences and perceptions of family carers of people with a chronic life-limiting illness living at home regarding the collaboration with different healthcare providers in the last phase life, showed that family carers experience a lot of possibilities, but perceive missed opportunities as well, for healthcare professionals to effectively collaborate with them for palliative care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
End-of-life topics were discussed in 36% of consultations (in regional hospitals, 53%; in academic settings, 27%), and predominantly during diagnostic consultations (54%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
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
We developed a comprehensive set of quality indicators of appropriate and inappropriate end-of-life care in people with Alzheimer's disease, cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, to be used in population-level research. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Despite calls for improved access to palliative care for people with Parkinson's disease, services have been slow in developing. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
According to the NH staff, fairly good quality care was provided, but the psychosocial and spiritual aspects of care need to be addressed more in the last days of the dying NH patient's life. 2 key findings →
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
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
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 27,780 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 27,780 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.1% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.3%), 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.
1,034 records (3.7% 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 →