27,380 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Of 44 844 patients invited to the APT Webstudy, the mean (SD) age was 64.7 (10.1) years, 25 447 (56.8%) were women, 25 044 (55.8%) had Medicaid insurance, 11 347 (25.3%) were Hispanic/Latino, 9526 (21.2%) were non-Hispanic Asian, 6044 (13.5%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 12 109 (27%) were non-Hispanic White. 2 key findings →
Participants: 844 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Alzheimer disease and related dementias were associated with adverse financial events years prior to clinical diagnosis that become more prevalent after diagnosis and were most common in lower-education census tracts. 4 key findings →
Participants: 81 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Among 52 participants recruited, 27 were former caregivers, 16 were current caregivers, and nine were persons with dementia; experiences reflected Alzheimer's (n = 18), sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob (n = 12), Lewy body (n = 7), and other dementias (n = 15). 5 key findings →
Participants: 18 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
= 0.01). We also found that greater use of emotion-focused coping and deriving greater gains in caregiving mitigated the negative association between caregiver financial difficulty and their distress and perception of PwSDs' well-being. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
In years when older adults subjectively reported fewer difficulties with their finances, they objectively performed better at financial tasks and this relationship became stronger over 10 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 2,802 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
52.7% of dementia caregivers in the United States experience financial toxicity. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This narrative review examines how socioeconomic disparities accelerate health decline in older adults. 1 key finding →
Design: narrative review Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Study 1 showed that each person's financial strain was associated with their own greater depressive symptoms. 2 key findings →
Participants: 147 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
This article explores how married couples managed their finances and made financial decisions when one spouse had dementia, drawing comparisons with the approaches used prior to the illness. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Although diagnostic markers in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) have become a rapidly growing research field, they have not as yet been investigated in relation to capacities that are of interest to geriatric psychiatry and neuropsychology, such as financial capacity. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
Polypharmacy is an important healthcare issue, especially in elderly patients with dementia. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
The largest increase in the older adult population in U.S. history is something to celebrate—yet, at the same time, current and future trends signal that financial exploitation is, and will continue to be, a significant threat for older adults. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Of 1648 patients with COVID-19 admitted to 38 hospitals, 398 (24.2%) died during hospitalization and 1250 (75.8%) survived. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 1,648 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Dementia represents a substantial financial burden on society, one that is similar to the financial burden of heart disease and cancer. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 856 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Physicians have a responsibility to recognize caregiver burden. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
This study provides preliminary evidence that falls among community-dwelling older adults are associated with factors such as age, female gender, fear of falling, history of falls, unclear vision, depression, and balance disorders. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Participants: 31 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Health care expenditures among persons with dementia were substantially larger than those for other diseases, and many of the expenses were uncovered (uninsured). 1 key finding →
Design: retrospective cohort Participants: 1,702 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
We identified 19 studies with primary data. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Over follow-up, 449 (18.3%) participants developed dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Free full text
Recommendations for practice include development of standardized guidelines that address caregiver assessment, education, and resources; identification of "caregiver champions" in practice settings; provision of referrals to established support organizations for caregivers (eg, Cancer Support Community, Cancer Care); and collaboration among caregiving, professional, and cancer-related organizations to advocate policy and practice changes for family caregivers. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source Full text may need a subscription
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
There is little evidence that interventions aimed at supporting and/or providing information to carers of people with dementia are uniformly effective. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
This study followed a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries who died and compared total health and long-term care spending in their final five years of life. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort Participants: 1,702 Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Two distinct literacy profiles emerged. The first group (N=121, 44%) had higher level of literacy at baseline, slower decline and less variabilities over time. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study Participants: 121 Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
Alive PWD (n = 804) were 2.36 times more likely to have an overnight hospital stay (p = 0.004) and 1.96 times more likely to have multiple hospitalizations when caregivers found it physically difficult to provide care (p = 0.011). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional Participants: 899 Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies → Original source
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
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.
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 27,380 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.
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of it. It holds 27,380 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC (60.6% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.6%), 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.
1,032 records (3.8% 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 →