Training gaps in the U.S. dementia care workforce impact patient support. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
43/100
Dementia is one of the leading causes of death in the US. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The care of a patient with neurologic disease at end-of-life requires expertise in addressing advance care planning, hospice, symptom management, and caregiver support. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recent policy focus in dementia care has been on living well with the condition; however, being able to die well with dementia is of equal importance. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Of 3883 older adults receiving a first palliative care consultation from this organization, 22% (855) had a dementia diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Advance care planning (ACP) in palliative care is essential for patient autonomy and quality of dying. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is characterised by memory loss, behavioural changes and decline of cognitive, social and physical functions and is a life-limiting condition. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia usually occurs as a result of brain disease and, while it is usually chronic or progressive in nature, it has not traditionally been conceptualised as a terminal or life-limiting syndrome. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Fifty respondents identified themselves as music therapists currently working with clients receiving PEOLC. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Individuals from minoritized racial/ethnic groups face a disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The burden of neurological disease is increasing globally. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Older adults classified with dementia were more likely to drop out of the labor force and become poor than similar older adults without dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is a major health concern in society, particularly in the aging population. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
During follow up (mean 11.1 years), 13% of Veterans developed dementia. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Compared to White participants, Black, Hispanic, and Asian participants reported taking fewer total medications (incidence rate ratio [IRR] ± standard error[SE] = 0.903 ± 0.017, 0.875 ± 0.021, and 0.912 ± 0.041, respectively, all p < 0.01). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The Washington University School of Medicine Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center's "African American Participation in Alzheimer Disease Research: Effective Strategies" Workshop convened to address a major limitation of the ongoing scientific progress regarding Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD): participants in most ADRD research programs overwhelmingly have been limited to non-Hispanic white persons, thus precluding knowledge as to how ADRD may be represented in non-white individuals. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Significant disparities in symptom severity reported by Alzheimer's caretakers were observed among the racial groups analyzed. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Alzheimer's disease (AD) disproportionately affects certain racial and ethnic subgroups, such as African American/Black and Hispanic adults. 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overly restrictive clinical trial eligibility criteria can reduce generalizability, slow enrollment, and disproportionately exclude historically underrepresented populations. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients had a mean age of 70.4 (±6.6) years and 97.8% were men. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Participants indicated skepticism regarding the use of precision medicine in their communities. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found that four items-a Medicare claim recording ADRD 1 year ago, 2 years ago, 3 years ago, and a total stay of 6 months in a nursing home-exhibit a pattern of association consistent with a single underlying ADRD construct, and presence of any two of these four items predict a direct measure of cognitive function and also future claims for ADRD. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results of the simulations show that by prolonging the length of a person's 'stay' in the Mild, Moderate, or Severe stage, the total cost of care for all persons with AD will increase by 2080. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Out-of-pocket costs of dementia care were collected via a web-based weekly survey for up to 18 months. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
We examined how methods used for identifying dementia in administrative claims affected dementia incidence across racial/ethnic populations using a 100% sample of Medicare beneficiaries (n = 23,793,452). 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 28,180 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 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%), 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 →