A total of 58 studies met the inclusion criteria, with most conducted in the USA (37.9%) and Europe. 5 key findings →
Participants: 58 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
The incidences of POD and sarcopenia in geriatric hip fracture patients are high. 4 key findings →
Participants: 234 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
44/100
Delirium is a neuropsychiatric syndrome that is pathophysiologically related to both mental (dementia, depression) and physical illness. 5 key findings →
Participants: 224 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
LUS and cognitive impairment are strong predictors of delirium in elderly COVID-19 patients. 3 key findings →
Participants: 64 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Among 45,651 patients, 311 delirium events occurred among continuous users and 84 among early discontinuers, corresponding to incidence rates of 66 and 112 events per 10,000 person-years, respectively. 5 key findings →
Participants: 45,651 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
A total of 8,062,333 subjects hospitalized with COPD exacerbation were included, of whom 574,005 (7.2%) had a diagnosis of delirium. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium is a complex and multifactorial condition associated with long-term cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The final analysis included 636 older dementia patients, with a mean age of 78.2 ± 6.3 years, of whom 187 (29.4%) developed delirium during hospitalization. 5 key findings →
Participants: 636 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We conducted two studies with medically hospitalized cancer and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) patients to assess the reliability and validity of a new measure of delirium severity, the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS). 4 key findings →
Participants: 33 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This is the first prospective study employing validated measures of delirium to identify an association between preexisting obstructive sleep apnea and postoperative delirium. 5 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Postoperative delirium is a serious complication. 4 key findings →
Participants: 12 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The odds ratio (OR) for Alzheimer's disease was 0.996 with a p-value of 0.443 using the inverse variance weighted algorithm, and the OR associated with the outcome variable of delirium was 0.393 with a p-value of 0.343. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
43/100
Few ill health situations are more degrading to people of any age than loss of reasoning, faculties, and personhood. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
DSD occurred in 680 patients (39.8%). Compared with dementia alone, DSD was associated with higher PAS scores (5.3 vs. 4.0, p < 0.001), poorer functional status (FIM 48.6 vs. 57.8, p < 0.001) and more frequent in-hospital falls (29.9% vs. 17.5%, p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,709 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
POD occurred in 43 patients (4.1%). Affected patients were older, in poorer preoperative health, and had longer anaesthesia and surgery times. 5 key findings →
Participants: 43 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Delirium, a severe neuropsychiatric syndrome characterised by acute deficits in attention and self-awareness, is common among elderly inpatients, with incidence increasing with age and prolonged hospitalisation. 2 key findings →
Participants: 89 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
There are meaningful differences in the readability of patient information generated by different large language models. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We conducted an open, prospective trial of olanzapine for the treatment of delirium in a sample of 79 hospitalized cancer patients. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
41/100
Delirium can be defined as an 'acute brain dysfunction.' 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
41/100
Future experiments and validation studies Future research should determine the extent to which prevention of surgery-induced microgliosis and/or neurovascular unit dysfunction can prevent or ameliorate postoperative memory and attention deficits in animal models. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Of the 59 residents, 57 (96⋅6%) tested positive (mean age: 82⋅8; women: 66⋅7%). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
In an Essay, Andrew Jackson and colleagues discuss challenges in the diagnosis and management of older people with dementia and delirium in acute hospitals. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Within the 440 included surveys, respondents particularly over-estimated frailty prevalence in older hospitalised patients, with two-thirds choosing between 41 and 80% prevalence, when the literature suggests only 23-46%, but paradoxically underestimated the frequency of frailty in people with delirium (more than three quarters of responses across 21-80%; literature suggests 71-93%). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In AD-like mice surgery induced acute changes in amyloid-β; perioperative treatment with pVNS effectively reduced amyloid-β load, plaque sphericity, and neuronal loss. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Several interconnected themes were identified as potential resources that enable recovery from delirium: (a) social contact and recovery of social lives; (b) the need for information, support, and education; (c) personalisation and personhood; (d) relationship continuity with professional carers; (e) the experience and involvement of carers; and (f) treating the cause and healthy lifestyle. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
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 →