After covariate adjustment, there were few significant racial differences in caregiving strain, health, and service use. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
After covariate adjustment, there were few significant racial differences in caregiving strain, health, and service use. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A formal evaluation of the health equity impact of a new intervention is hardly ever performed as part of a health technology assessment to understand its value. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Extensive literature in the United States documents racial/ethnic and gender disparities in the incidence and prevalence of dementia yet few studies have examined how race/ethnicity and gender intersect to shape inequalities in the risk of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Hispanics and Asians diagnosed with dementia had 40% lower mortality risk and African Americans had 13% lower mortality risk than Whites. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
DISCLOSURES: Funding for this summary was contributed by Arnold Ventures, The Donaghue Foundation, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), an independent organization that evaluates the evidence on the value of health care interventions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The total healthcare cost of ADD was JPY 1,073 billion, of which 86% (JPY 923 billion) was attributed to healthcare costs other than ADD drug costs (JPY 151 billion). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The annual cost of care per patient with mild to moderate and severe major MCD was INR 78288 and INR 167808, respectively. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The objectives of this study are (1) to identify beneficiary-level characteristics associated with skilled nursing facility (SNF) length of stay (LOS), and (2) to determine if significant differences in LOS exist for vulnerable populations at the individual level or among nursing homes that serve a disproportionate share of vulnerable populations. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Under the initial assumption that the hypothetical gene therapy grants a 30% risk reduction in disease progression and entry into institutional care, the maximum cost-effective price for gene therapy is $141,126 per treatment using the threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with prior AD diagnosis used substantially more medical services every year until their VD/PD diagnosis, resulting in incremental annual medical costs of approximately $9,500-$14,000. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Policy makers in the US are increasingly concerned that greater use of the Medicare hospice benefit by people with dementia is driving up costs. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Recognizing that the "healthcare sector perspective" can be too limited in some situations, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), and the U.S. Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine all recommend a "societal" perspective in "reference case" cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Anti-amyloid antibody treatment for Alzheimer’s disease is linked to Amyloid-Related Imaging Abnormalities (ARIA), including vasogenic edema (ARIA-E) and microhemorrhages (ARIA-H), especially in ApoE ε4/4 carriers. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Considering the overall sci-entific evidence presented, it is important to note that GLPs are no longer just antihyperglycemic drugs but are remarkably versatile, with a future in almost every field of medicine. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
DSI emerged as a significant predictor across both MoCA and CBB, surpassing the predictive power of both types of PTAs. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This case underscores the importance of routine sodium monitoring in elderly patients with dementia initiated on serotonergic or antipsychotic therapy. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study is one the first to account of attribute development for a DCE examining the public preferences for autonomy enhancing dementia care in Ireland. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The project Aging in Place applies a novel approach to investigate how social care services in Sweden are adapted to preferences and needs of older persons living at home with dementia (including their partners). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A persistent gap remains between policy ambitions and everyday practice. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This intervention represents the output of the iterative development of a complex intervention to fulfil an unmet need for PwD and sensory loss. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Differentially methylated positions (DMPs) between persons with and without late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) were observed at 477 of 769,190 loci in a plurality of genes. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The pathological potential of human astroglia in Alzheimer's disease (AD) was analysed in vitro using induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technology. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found that brain YKL-40 immunoreactivity was observed in a subset of astrocytes in all four diseases and in controls. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In regards to policy-making decisions and resource allocation, the success of making technology more accessible to the marginalized older population should not be measured solely on the outcome of avoiding acute care services; its benefits should rather be assessed with functional health as the focus of intervention, including measures of psychophysical well-being and life satisfaction.9 Higher-end immersive technologies could be installed as a private expense in a patient's room; they could also be made available in common recreational areas within a leisure and/or fitness room, provided by the LTC facility through support of government subsidies and incentives aimed at promoting health of its aging population. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Hearing loss affects close to 1.3 billion people and is a growing global health concern as the fourth leading contributor to years lived with disability. 1 The global economic cost associated with hearing loss is estimated at 750 billion United States dollars (US$) annually.2 However, hearing loss has limited public health support, especially in low-and middle-income countries, where incidence is high and resources often scarce and unequally distributed.
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 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.
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 →