Frailty and depression are important issues affecting older adults. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
27,780 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Poor external validity can result in inadequate treatment decision information. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
Decrease in delirium scores were not significantly different comparing the effect of low dose haloperidol (< 3.0 mg per day) with the atypical antipsychotics olanzapine and risperidone (Odds ratio 0.63 (95% CI 10.29 - 1.38; p = 0.25). 5 key findings →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This cohort study found that delirium was associated with a 40% acceleration in the slope of cognitive decline out to 72 months following elective surgery. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 560 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
These studies show that remote physical activity monitoring is feasible in neurological diseases, including in people with moderate to severe neurological disability. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We found no definitive evidence on effectiveness, or lack of effectiveness, of specific interventions but studies were small and short term. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
However, further research is needed with studies using larger sample sizes, standardized measurement outcomes, and longer follow-up periods, to inform evidence-based recommendations. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Interventions using educational outreach, on-site education given alone or as part of an intervention package and pharmacist medication review may under certain circumstances reduce inappropriate drug use, but the evidence is of low quality. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
DSD is a strong predictor of functional dependence, institutionalization, and mortality in older patients admitted to a rehabilitation setting, suggesting that strategies to detect DSD routinely in practice should be developed and DSD should be included in prognostic models of health care. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 2,642 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The results from our meta-analysis suggest that the incidence of falls of older adults living in nursing homes is high, and the risk factors for falls are various. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
These findings provide no evidence of a group-level Alzheimer-related p-tau217 elevation in young people with DSRD and support DSRD as a condition distinct from Alzheimer's disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 132 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
ACP is complex, and trial characteristics were heterogeneous. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
67/100
End-of-life care for patients with dementia was extremely demanding of family caregivers. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Seventeen randomized clinical trials tested decision tools in serious illness. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A mortality risk score derived from MDS data predicted six-month survival in advanced dementia with moderate accuracy. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study Participants: 22,405 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Hospice enrollment correlates with reduced Medicare expenditures among younger decedents with cancer but increased expenditures among decedents without cancer and those older than 84 years of age. 2 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 245 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
NHs appear to provide less-aggressive end-of-life care to decedents with dementia than to those without. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 1,261,726 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Extrapolating results to the US population, we estimate that annually nearly a million individuals who are likely eligible for hospice die without its services. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,209 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most families chose comfort as the primary GOC. 4 key findings →
Participants: 302 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our results demonstrate delirium is a significant marker of mortality among seniors in the ED, and mortality risk is most salient in the first 3 months following an ED visit. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 26 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
We conducted a systematic review of the use of quality of life (QoL) measures as outcome in pharmacological and nonpharmacologic intervention trials in patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment or dementia, and their proxies. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Real-world deprescribing patterns of antihypertensives among NH residents with HTN and LLE/AD appear to reflect variation in recommendations for HTN treatment intensity and individualization of patient care in a population with potential overtreatment. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 10,574 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Later GOCDs were associated with greater risk of aggressive interventions and death as an inpatient and greater odds of ICU admission. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 197 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Palliative care is related to reduced life-sustaining treatments for patients with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study Participants: 1,996 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
A novel method using an EHR phenotype plus brief medical record review is effective to identify hospitalized patients with late-stage dementia. 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 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 →