I consider applications of “AI extenders” to dementia care. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Nutrition risk was more common among caregivers when PWD demonstrated nutrition risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The Tailored Activity Program (TAP), an intervention for people living with dementia (PLWD) and their caregivers, has been shown to reduce behavioral symptoms for PLWD and caregiver burden. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Our analysis revealed a diverse range of topics reflecting community members' varying needs and concerns of individuals affected by AD/ADRD. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Participants found MATCH acceptable (combined AES median score of 28, range 25-34) and useful (SUS median score of 73.5, range 55-100). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
After a 30-minute educational session, participants showed greater positivity toward an ADRD diagnosis and increased confidence in discussing early detection. 5 key findings →
Participants: 25 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Black participants had low (vs high) OP, which predicted worse episodic memory and global cognition (4% to 7% mediated). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
37/100
Key reflections from advisor meetings guided cultural adaptation: lived experiences on dementia caregiving; patient, caregiver, and clinician interactions in the health care system; and limited knowledge and misconceptions of palliative care. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Four major themes emerged: Unfolding Process of ADRD Discovery , Resilience is Multifaceted in Caregiving , Resilience is an Adaptive Process , and Cultural Heritage Shapes Caregivers' Resilience Experiences . 1 key finding →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 0.002). A sharp transient increase occurred in 2020, attributable to pandemic-related factors including disproportionate COVID-19 mortality among older adults with neurodegenerative conditions, care disruptions, and changes in death-certificate coding practices. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Twenty-eight caregivers completed the intervention, which increased caregiver mastery and decreased stress and burden. 5 key findings →
Design: open-label trial Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The incidence of dementia declined by 26% percent (95% confidence interval: -26.2; -25.3), from 2020 per 100 000 insured individuals in 2015 to 1500 per 100 000 in 2022. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
From 1990 to 2021, the incidence, prevalence, and DALYs of ADOD have significantly risen both globally and in China, with the growth rates in China notably surpassing the global average. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding into dementia-related health and social care, with proposed applications ranging from early risk detection and monitoring to care coordination and service planning. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Significant differences in 64% of engagement-related behaviors were found between groups, notably in torso movements, voice modulation, facial expressions, and concentration. 5 key findings →
Participants: 15 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
So far, we included 42 patients in our study, that were monitored for at least 7 consecutive days and nights, to form the largest database of its kind in the world. 5 key findings →
Participants: 42 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
AD patients exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of APOE e3/e4 and e4/e4 genotypes compared to DLB and HC (p <0.001). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Informed consent is a critical ethical requirement in research, ensuring the protection of participants' rights and promoting their wellbeing and autonomy. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
The calibration models for photopic lux and correlated color temperature demonstrated strong accuracy, with an adjusted R² of 0.858 and 0.982, respectively, ensuring reliable sensor measurements. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Significant predictive performance was observed for several neurocognitive disorders. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
37/100
Dementia is a progressive condition that affects cognition, communication, mobility, and independence, posing growing challenges for individuals, caregivers, and healthcare systems. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
37/100
The attributes of concepts of social frailty and social isolation overlap, including being alone and having limited or less social activities, engagements or interactions. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
< .01). All patient groups were also impaired on AVLT encoding, TMT-B and TMT B/A. Social and non-social neurocognitive functions differed between groups, with specific impairments in processing speed in VaD, emotion recognition in bv-FTD and memory retrieval in AD, and memory encoding and cognitive control impaired in all three groups. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Oxidative stress is deeply involved in multiple pathological processes of VaD. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Vascular dementia (VaD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by chronic oxygen insufficiency, leading to the generation of oxygen-free radicals, inflammatory responses, disturbances in iron metabolism, lipid peroxidation, and other pathological changes that disrupt intracellular homeostasis. 5 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 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 →