Palliative care aims to improve the quality of life of patients and their families affected by life-threatening illness. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Each vignette promoted discussion of differences of perspectives about the ways to enhance the dignity of people with dementia in hospital, care home and community settings. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia is a progressive terminal disease. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
Our results help to elucidate the tasks and roles required of FPs to make integration of a palliative care approach into the care continuum possible. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The experience of being a carer of a person with dementia at the end of life is expressed in these 12 accounts. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Patients with dementia receive suboptimal palliative care, and this patient group is at risk to have pain at the end of life. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Concerning pain assessment, the findings of this review suggest that self-report pain rating scales, in particular the Verbal Rating Scale, the Horizontal Visual Analogue Scale and the Faces Pain Scale can be administered to patients in a more advanced stage of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Physicians should consider advanced dementia as a terminal disease for which there is a continuum of care that goes from palliative care with life-extending measures to symptomatic interventions only. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Based on current scientific literature, gastrostomy tube (G-tube) placement or other long-term enteral access devices should be withheld in patients with advanced dementia or other near end-of-life conditions. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The booklet may help nurses educate families about end-of-life issues in dementia palliative care, but local adaptation of the booklet content and physician engagement are necessary. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Several areas of end-of-life care provision could be improved. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Delirium is a complex neuropsychiatric syndrome with generalized cognitive impairment and disproportionate inattention. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Most rural focus group participants voiced unqualified acceptance of death and placed few conditions on death, beyond their hope that it would be quick and peaceful. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Benefits of palliative care in dementia are acknowledged by experts worldwide, but there is some controversy around its early introduction. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The purpose of this literature review was to assess the current state of affairs in end-of-life care for persons with dementia, to identify barriers to the provision of high-quality care, and to describe exemplary programs that have discovered ways to overcome these barriers. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Cognitive complaints are common in the geriatric population. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
Educating families and professionals about palliative care is important as many professionals and non-professionals believe that this approach intends to hasten death, instead of affirming life and regarding dying as a normal process. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Providing artificial feeding and fluids and discussing euthanasia may be particularly sensitive topics, and guidance on these subjects needs careful consideration of ethical aspects and possible adaptations to local standards and practice. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Because previous research favored care in the Netherlands to that in the United States, findings suggest improvement in end-of-life care and outcomes in the United States and stability in the Netherlands. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This pilot study examined whether an interactive, computer based decision aid can help patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) engage in effective advance care planning. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The single most common cause of death occurring within the nursing home was Alzheimer's, with most dying appropriately on hospice care. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Because survival time varies greatly in dementia, it is difficult for dementia patients to meet a key criterion for the Medicare Hospice Benefit, a six-month survival time. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Our findings indicate the possible need for increased support for caregivers, including educational interventions targeting pain etiology and assessment, and improved communication with health-care professionals. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
The uptake of advance care planning (ACP) is particularly low among people with dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
36/100
Over the years 2005-2006, many ECPs took care of patients with dementia and an ADE, actual life termination of these patients took place very rarely and never in incompetent patients. 5 key findings →
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 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 →