This article examines transitions between the community and nursing homes among the private pay and the Medicaid eligible older (65+) persons. 3 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.
Change in quality of life was better in facilities that used a specialized worker approach, trained more staff in more domains central to dementia care, and encouraged activity participation. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
38/100
This article describes the prevalence, assessment, and treatment of, as well as characteristics associated with, mobility limitation in 343 residents with dementia in 45 assisted living facilities and nursing homes. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A study of 127 informal caregivers of Alzheimer's disease patients in Florida's Tampa Bay area was undertaken to determine the correlates of the five components of burden, as measured by the Cost of Care Index, a multidimensional measure of caregiving burden. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Spouse-caregivers of Alzheimer's disease patients were randomly assigned to either a treatment group (individual and family counseling, support group participation, and ad hoc consultation) or a control group (only routine support). 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Four main themes were identified: (1) reasons family caregivers may not choose formal care, (2) perceived benefits of formal care, (3) how family caregivers choose formal care, and (4) recommendations for delivering information about formal care options. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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
An analysis of interaction terms in the Cox regression model found that those individuals who utilized in-home help services earlier in their dementia caregiving careers were more likely to delay institutionalization. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, participants in the Coping With Caregiving condition reported a significant reduction in depressive symptoms, increased use of adaptive coping strategies, and a trend toward decreased use of negative coping strategies when compared with those in the Enhanced Support Group condition. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found associations between each behavioral health measure and particular environmental design features, as well as between behavioral health measures and both resident and nonenvironmental facility variables. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
It is well recognized that the number of older adults who suffer from dementia has been increasing and will continue to do so over the coming years. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Hospital dementia care discourse on Reddit advanced 4 negative sentiment themes: (1) fear of poor medication management, hydration, and hygiene, (2) loss of patient advocacy, (3) precipitation of advance directive discussions, and (4) delayed discharge and loss of nursing home bed. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Compared with waiver enrollees, PACE enrollees had 31% lower risk of long-term NH admission (p < .001). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
31/100
Planned transitions among settings need to be carried out with grace, redundancy of information and accountability, and patient/family involvement. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
As has been noted, Alzheimer’s and related dementias are underdiagnosed and when diagnoses are made, they are too often undisclosed by clinicians: studies suggest that fewer than half of individuals report being told of their diagnoses (Alzheimer’s Association, 2015). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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 →