Identifying ancestry-specific molecular profiles of late-onset Alzheimer's Disease (LOAD) in brain tissue is crucial to understand novel mechanisms and develop effective interventions in non-European, high-risk populations. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 731
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
78/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2013-04-01
Genome-wide significance in fully adjusted models (sex, age, APOE genotype, population stratification) was observed for a SNP in ABCA7 (rs115550680, allele = G; frequency, 0.09 cases and 0.06 controls; odds ratio [OR], 1.79 [95% CI, 1.47-2.12]; P = 2.2 × 10(-9)), which is in linkage disequilibrium with SNPs previously associated with Alzheimer disease in Europeans (0.8 Conclusions and relevance In this meta-analysis of data from African American participants, Alzheimer disease was significantly associated with variants in ABCA7 and with other genes that have been associated with Alzheimer disease in individuals of European ancestry. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 5,896
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
78/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2021-01-01
In addition, several loci associated with rare variants, including a genome-wide significant intergenic locus near IGF1R at 15q26 (P = 1.7 × 10-9) and 6 additional loci with suggestive significance (P ≤ 5 × 10-7) such as API5 at 11p12 (P = 8.8 × 10-8) and RBFOX1 at 16p13 (P = 5.4 × 10-7) were identified. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 2,784
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
1997-10-01
Among Caucasian subjects from clinic- or autopsy-based studies, the risk of AD was significantly increased for people with genotypes epsilon2/epsilon4 (OR=2.6, 95% CI=1.6-4.0), epsilon3/epsilon4 (OR=3.2, 95% CI=2.8-3.8), and epsilon4/epsilon4 (OR=14.9, 95% CI= 10.8-20.6); whereas, the ORs were decreased for people with genotypes epsilon2/epsilon2 (OR=0.6, 95% CI=0.2-2.0) and epsilon2/epsilon3 (OR=0.6, 95% CI=0.5-0.8). 2 key findings →
Participants: 5,930
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
1998-03-01
The presence of an APOE-epsilon4 allele is a determinant of AD risk in whites, but African Americans and Hispanics have an increased frequency of AD regardless of their APOE genotype. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,079
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A one standard deviation increase in AD-PGS was associated with an accelerated time to dementia diagnosis by 4.8 months. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 7,039
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2019-03-01
There were no racial differences in the frequency of cerebral ischemic lesions noted on results of brain magnetic resonance imaging, mean cortical standardized uptake value ratios for Pittsburgh compound B, or for amyloid-β42 concentrations in CSF. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 1,255
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The higher risk of AD among blacks may stem from lower level of cognitive test performance persisting throughout the observation period rather than faster rate of late-life cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Participants: 7,735
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
63/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.
·
PLoS genetics
·
2018-12-05
The ApoE ε4 allele is the most significant genetic risk factor for late-onset Alzheimer disease. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,766
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Our ancestry-aware regression approach showed that AA individuals have a lower risk of AD if they inherited African ancestry admixture block at the 17p13.2 locus. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control
Participants: 10,271
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Compared with individuals with the APOEepsilon3/epsilon3, the odds of having AD were significantly increased among those with 1 or more copies of the epsilon4 allele; the odds ratio (OR) for the epsilon3/epsilon4 genotype was 2.6 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-3.7), and the OR for the epsilon4/epsilon4 genotype was 10.5 (95% CI, 5.1-21.8). 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 338
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
The APOE-ε4/ε4 genotype is the strongest genetic risk factor for sporadic Alzheimer's disease, though the relative risk is diminished in individuals with African ancestry. 2 key findings →
Design: case-control
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Our genome-wide search of Caribbean Hispanic individuals identified several novel genetic variants associated with LOAD and replicated these associations in a white cohort. 3 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
55/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 55 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2002-01-01
However, in this study, the additional risk of dementia conferred by being a first-degree relative, by being female, or by the probability of having an APOE epsilon4 allele appeared similar in African American and white families. 1 key finding →
Participants: 17
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
This common ABCA7 deletion could represent an ethnic-specific pathogenic alteration in AD. 3 key findings →
Participants: 1,068
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The reasons for these differences remain unclear. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Two ABCA7 missense variants (rs3764647 and rs3752239) demonstrated significant association with AD risk. 4 key findings →
Participants: 319
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We confirm in a completely independent data set that CR1, CLU, and PICALM are AD susceptibility loci in European ancestry populations. 5 key findings →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
50/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2026-03-06
In their study, Chen et al 1 examined the association between apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype and longitudinal cognitive trajectories among middle-aged and older East Asian adults participating in the Healthy Aging Longitudinal Study of Taiwan (HALST).Although sporadic late-onset Alzheimer disease (AD) is polygenic, APOE remains the strongest genetic determinant of AD risk, with carriers of the APOE ε4 allele having increased odds of developing AD dementia in a dose-dependent manner compared with APOE ε3 homozygotes. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 21
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The findings from the AHEAD Study screening process and longitudinal data from the LEARN Study are providing critical data to guide future prevention trial design. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,000
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Some genes contribute to AD pathogenesis in both white and African American cohorts, although it is unclear whether the causal variants are the same. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
45/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 45 out of 100.
·
UNC Libraries
·
2026-07-11
Among 5712 adults (mean [SD] age, 63.47 (8.15) years; unweighted 3663 [53.92%] female), higher ln(ptau-181) was associated with ECog-12 memory (unstandardized β = 0.088; 95% CI, 0.005-0.170). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 5,712
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among most Latinos in northern Manhattan who learned they had an APOE ε4/ε4 genotype, disclosure did not provoke elevated levels of distress. 3 key findings →
Participants: 61
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Apolipoprotein-E epsilon 4 (APOE-epsilon 4) has been consistently associated with Alzheimer disease (AD) and may be responsible for an earlier age at onset. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
For decades, the study of genetically isolated populations has improved our understanding and management of genetic diseases that affect all populations. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
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.