27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
More than one-quarter of residents with ADRD remain untreated with guideline-recommended pharmacotherapy, and treatment varied significantly by non-clinical predictors. 5 key findings →
Participants: 359,801 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Real-terms UK government spending on health-related long-term care grew by £6.4 billion (22.9%) between 2013 and 2022, from £27.9 to £34.3 billion. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Oral health is a key component of quality of life among older adults, yet maintaining preventive dental care becomes increasingly difficult for those with long-term care (LTC) needs. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,055 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Overall, 81.7% of residents diagnosed with depression had ≥1 pharmacological depression treatment order. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The multifactorial interventions implemented in community settings showed no effect on dementia onset or health outcomes. 5 key findings →
Participants: 256 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Passive sleep monitoring identified physiologically interpretable sleep markers associated with next-day agitation occurrence, supporting prospective evaluation of under-mattress sensing as a source of short-term risk information for dementia care. 4 key findings →
Participants: 55 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Contexts and mechanisms associated with attendees’ and caregivers’ social determinants of health, and system-level contexts and mechanisms that influence ADPs are important knowledge gaps to be addressed by studies and to be incorporated in our program theory in the future. 3 key findings →
Participants: 17 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Strengths and limitations of this study This study evaluates a digitally enabled remote monitoring model for people living with dementia that integrates passive in-home sensors and algorithm-derived digital biomarkers to detect clinically relevant changes such as infection risk, behavioural disturbance and physiological deterioration. 5 key findings →
Participants: 100 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among adults with ADRD, high SDM was associated with greater ACP prevalence in unadjusted analyses, although the fully adjusted association was not statistically significant. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,635 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Two analytical themes were identified: (1) challenges in preserving the person's voice throughout the dementia trajectory, reflecting a shift toward caregiver-mediated decision-making, assumptions about capacity, and delayed ACP initiation; and (2) challenges in maintaining continuity of expressed values and preferences over time, reflecting uncertainty about future care needs and the limitations of one-time ACP conversations. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The increasing prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) underscores the need for care models that preserve identity, autonomy, and comfort throughout disease progression. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
After more than three decades of intensive research, Alzheimer disease care remains largely palliative, and the field has drawn sustained criticism, both for that reason and for pursuing some directions of inquiry over others. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found that 75% of participants would choose for their life to end in the early stages of ADRD. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,015 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 2144 participants (540 deaths over a median 4.4 years of survivor follow-up; 25% mortality), the seven-marker score plus age and sex achieved an apparent C of 0.74 (optimism-corrected 0.74), versus 0.68 for age and sex alone (Δ ≈ 0.06); the blood panel alone reached C 0.72. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 2,144 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The SPICT-TR is a culturally adapted, valid, and reliable assessment tool for identifying patients with palliative care needs within the Turkish healthcare system. 4 key findings →
Participants: 356 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We examined how often each diagnosed disease appeared on the certificate, its location and selection as the UCD, factors associated with its appearance (logistic regression), disease-specific mortality (multiple decrement life tables), and disease associations (Cause of Death Association Indicator, CDAI). 3 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Data collection started on June 3, 2026, and is planned to close on June 30, 2026. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We included 23 studies with qualitative (73.9%) or quantitative/mixed-methods (26.1%) designs. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 23 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Persons with dementia (PWD) and their care partners experience multidimensional care transitions across the illness trajectory. 1 key finding →
Participants: 20 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Forty‑two studies published between 1997 and 2025 were included. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Polypharmacy and PIMs are highly prevalent in end-of-life elderly cancer patients. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 183 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recorded PD-related mortality was lower among Black than White adults, whereas AD-related mortality showed no statistically significant racial difference. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This nationwide study provides epidemiological data on dementia and MCI among adults aged ≥ 60 years across all 12 administrative regions of Morocco. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 1,662 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Memory IIV may be more closely linked to hippocampal white matter, while mean memory performance may better reflect hippocampal volume. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study reports the prevalence of CF among elderly hypertensive residents of a community in Inner Mongolia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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 →