82/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2011-04-03
The Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium (ADGC) performed a genome-wide association study of late-onset Alzheimer disease using a three-stage design consisting of a discovery stage (stage 1) and two replication stages (stages 2 and 3). 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We found a sequence to pathological changes, with rates of Aβ deposition in mutation carriers being significantly different from those in non-carriers first (across regions that showed a significant difference, at a mean of 18·9 years [SD 3·3] before expected onset), followed by hypometabolism (14·1 years [5·1] before expected onset), and lastly structural decline (4·7 years [4·2] before expected onset). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 346
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
77/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100.
·
Genome biology
·
2025-07-17
Using cross-population GWAS meta-analyses, we identify novel LOAD susceptibility loci in/near LRRC4C and LHX5-AS1, both with known roles in neuronal development, as well as several novel population-unique loci. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 409,589
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration with neuronal inclusions of the TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (FTLD-TDP) is a fatal neurodegenerative disorder with only a limited number of risk loci identified. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 985
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2017-10-01
Contrary to long-standing views, men and women with the APOE ε3/ε4 genotype have nearly the same odds of developing AD from age 55 to 85 years, but women have an increased risk at younger ages. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2021-04-07
We tested the hypothesis that plasma neurofilament light chain (NfL) identifies asymptomatic carriers of familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD)-causing mutations at risk of disease progression. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 277
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2014-11-01
Analysis confirmed the association of APOE with earlier AAO (P = 3.3 × 10(-96)), with associations in CR1 (rs6701713, P = 7.2 × 10(-4)), BIN1 (rs7561528, P = 4.8 × 10(-4)), and PICALM (rs561655, P = 2.2 × 10(-3)) reaching statistical significance (P Conclusions and relevance We confirmed an association of APOE (OMIM 107741) variants with AAO among affected participants with LOAD and observed novel associations of CR1 (OMIM 120620), BIN1 (OMIM 601248), and PICALM (OMIM 603025) with AAO. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 9,162
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
71/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100.
·
Stroke
·
2020-06-10
Periventricular white matter hyperintensities (WMH; PVWMH) and deep WMH (DWMH) are regional classifications of WMH and reflect proposed differences in cause. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 26,654
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2020-06-01
The large number of participants screened with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) and standardized assessments provides an unprecedented opportunity to evaluate factors associated with elevated brain amyloid. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 4,486
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2023-12-01
Data from 3960 MRI sessions among 1141 participants were included: 252 pathogenic variant carriers from DIAN (mean [SD] age, 38.4 [11.2] years; 137 [54%] female), 571 older adults from ADNI (mean [SD] age, 72.8 [7.3] years; 274 [48%] female), and 318 older adults from HABS (mean [SD] age, 72.4 [7.6] years; 194 [61%] female). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,141
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2010-02-14
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) is the second most common cause of presenile dementia. 1 key finding →
Participants: 515
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In the largest twin study to date, we confirmed that heritability for AD is high and that the same genetic factors are influential for both men and women. 3 key findings →
Participants: 11,884
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
The apolipoprotein E (APOE) gene is the best established genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease in later life, with the ε4 allele conferring higher risk. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 9,496
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Disease-modifying therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD) are likely to be most beneficial when initiated in the presymptomatic phase. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 567
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
63/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2026-03-30
Among 3414 included individuals, the mean (SD) age was 68.8 (6.0) years and 2116 (62%) were female. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,184
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Due to trisomy of chromosome 21 and the resultant extra copy of the amyloid precursor protein gene, nearly all adults with Down syndrome develop Alzheimer's disease pathology by the age of 40 years and are at high risk for dementia given their increased life expectancy compared with adults with Down syndrome in the past. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 41
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Higher plasma carotenoid concentrations were associated with slower cognitive decline in APOE ε4 carriers, potentially mitigating genetic risk. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 442
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Carriers of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) epsilon4 allele show significantly higher risk of Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 195
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Each additional copy of the apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) allele is associated with a higher risk of Alzheimer's dementia, while the APOE2 allele is associated with a lower risk of Alzheimer's dementia, it is not yet known whether APOE2 homozygotes have a particularly low risk. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
61/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100.
·
Nature
·
2012-05-16
Human apolipoprotein E has three isoforms: APOE2, APOE3 and APOE4. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Global PET amyloid burden was compared with regards to cognitive status, APOE ɛ4 status, sex, age, and estimated years to symptom onset. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 216
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
59/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.
·
Nature Medicine
·
2023-05-15
We characterized the world's second case with ascertained extreme resilience to autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease (ADAD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: preliminary
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Adults with Down syndrome develop the neuropathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease and are at very high risk of developing early-onset dementia, which is now the leading cause of death in this population. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We describe the first large-scale, potentially label-enabling clinical trial of a preclinical treatment for ADAD. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 300
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Measures are needed that identify persons that will develop Alzheimer's disease in order to target them for preventative interventions. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 20
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
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 28,580 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.