alzhub.org
Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

Research

28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.

Find studies

Showing 23,301–23,325 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed (page 933 of 1086) · 28,180 in the whole library · How the 0–100 score works

Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)

Browse by subject, author or institution

Each number is how many studies that link shows, with your other filters kept.

Subjects

Authors

Names as each record prints them; the same person can appear under two spellings.

Institutions

From OpenAlex; 13,658 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.

A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.

We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.

4430 Coffee Shops and Fast-food Restaurants: Potential Neighborhood Resources for Cognitive Health and Wellbeing Among Aging Americans

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science 2020-06-01

OF IMPACT: The results contribute new evidence towards an emerging ecological model of cognitive health. 5 key findings →

Participants: 16,404 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Applying the Relational Job Design Theory to the Retail Industry: The Association between Perceived Social Impact and Job Satisfaction, Turnover Intention, and Persistence

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Health & Social Care in the Community 2024-01-01

Retail workers contribute to the daily wellbeing of customers, including those living with disabilities or diseases. 2 key findings →

Participants: 145 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

In-hospital dementia-related deaths following implementation of the national dementia plan: observational study of national death certificates from 1996 to 2016

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. BMJ Open 2018-12-01

The annual number of deaths at hospital was consistently increased over time from 1996 to 2016 (age-adjusted OR: 6.01; 95% CI 5.81 to 6.21 versus home deaths). 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Functional levels and nurse workload of elderly awaiting nursing home placement and nursing home residents: a comparative study

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 2009-09-09

The aim of this study was twofold: to compare the functional levels of elderly awaiting nursing home placement and nursing home residents, and to compare their nurses' physical and psychological workloads. 5 key findings →

Participants: 36 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Hospitalization of Nursing Home Residents: The Right Rate?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1997-03-01

Thus, a region that is reacting to nursing home abuse might impose regulations or enforcement encouraging additional hospitalization of the frail, and a region that has an oversupply of nursing home beds might have younger and healthier residents who more often desire aggressive diagnosis and treatment. 5 key findings →

Participants: 32 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Burden of illness among patients with dementia-related psychosis

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Journal of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy 2021-02-27

A significantly higher percentage of DRP patients had ≥1 diagnosis for behavioral health conditions in the pre-index period compared with dementia-only patients (depression: 32.4% vs. 22.8%; anxiety: 19.1% vs. 11.5%; and insomnia: 9.0% vs. 6.3%; P < 0.001 for all comparisons). 5 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Do Medicare Beneficiaries Under Accountable Care or Medicare Advantage Use Lower Quality Nursing Homes?

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2024-12-31

Among SNF admissions from 2013 to 2018, the share of ACO-attributed beneficiaries increased from 7.6% to 20.2%, MA enrollees increased from 25.2% to 32.8%, and non-ACO-attributed TM enrollees decreased from 67.2% to 47.3%. 4 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Rapid Acting Insulin Use and Persistence among Elderly Type 2 Diabetes Patients Adding RAI to Oral Antidiabetes Drug Regimens

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Journal of Diabetes Research 2016-01-01

We examined the real-world utilization and persistence of rapid acting insulin (RAI) in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes who added RAI to their drug (OAD) regimen. 2 key findings →

Participants: 3,734 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Improving Community-Based Palliative Care Explanations: Insights From Persons Declining Services

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine® 2025-08-20

BackgroundA growing number of older adults in the United States have multiple chronic conditions which contribute to decreased functional ability and increased healthcare utilization. 5 key findings →

Participants: 22 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Classifying Dementia Diagnoses in the Baltimore Experience Corps Trial Using Medicare and Maryland’s Health Data

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Innovation in Aging 2025-12-01

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) administrative data are among the most practical sources for understanding the incidence of dementia over time in older populations, but have yet to be widely used in intervention studies. 1 key finding →

Participants: 135 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

The effects of socioeconomic status on perceived self‐efficacy among caregivers of persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Alzheimer s & Dementia 2025-12-01

There were no significant differences in self-efficacy related to obtaining respite and RDPB between SES groups. 5 key findings →

Participants: 144 Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

Oral Presentations of the 2018 Annual Meeting of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Neurosurgery 2018-08-17

Our robust machine learning based analytical pipeline consists of segmentation, radiomic texture extraction, feature normalization and selection, and predictive-model generation. 5 key findings →

Participants: 40 Evidence: moderate

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Area Deprivation Index and Progression to Dementia (S2.007)

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Neurology 2022-05-03

To investigate the association of the area deprivation index (ADI), as assigned at the census block group-level, with progression to dementia in cognitively unimpaired at baseline participants (≥50 years old) of the population-based Mayo Clinic Study of Aging (MCSA). 1 key finding →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription

Exploring hospital-based health information technology functions for patients with Alzheimer’s Disease and related Dementias

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 37 out of 100. Preventive Medicine Reports 2021-06-23

This study investigated whether hospital-adopted health information technology (HIT) is associated with a reduction in the frequency of preventable emergency department (ED) visits for patients with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). 3 key findings →

Evidence: low

Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text

↑ Change the filters

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 →

Newest studies, as a dated timeline →    Atom feed