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
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2020-08-03
Black decedents were less likely than White decedents to use hospice for 3 or more days (132 of 378 [34.9%] vs 385 of 834 [46.2%]; P Conclusions and relevance Despite the increase in the use of hospice care in recent decades, racial disparities in the use of hospice remain, especially for noncancer deaths. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,212
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
The Gerontologist
·
2021-07-01
Random-effects models revealed small but statistically significant effects with better psychological well-being in African American caregivers compared with white caregivers in both population-based (d = -0.22) and convenience sample studies (d = -0.21). 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 159
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In patients with sporadic ALS, we identified the repeat expansion in 236 (7·0%) of 3377 white individuals from the USA, Europe, and Australia, two (4·1%) of 49 black individuals from the USA, and six (8·3%) of 72 Hispanic individuals from the USA. 1 key finding →
Participants: 4,448
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Many older adults living with dementia have not been formally diagnosed. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Longer follow-up and testing across diverse LEP communities are needed to assess diagnosis, treatment initiation, and caregiver trajectories. 1 key finding →
Design: RCT
Participants: 287
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We found no statistically significant difference in measures of WM injury by race and ethnicity after adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors and socioeconomic status. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 1,036
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
BMC Medicine
·
2025-05-05
The mean age of participants was 77.1 years (SD = 7.6), and 2779 were women (weighted % = 56.7). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,238
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The rate of cognitive change in elderly persons with and without diabetes mellitus is similar, although cognitive performance is poorer in persons with diabetes mellitus. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,493
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
The Gerontologist
·
2019-09-01
Three themes emerged from 29 included studies: self-care needs and behaviors of ICGs, barriers to performing self-care, and enablers of self-care. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Many community-residing PWD and their caregivers have unmet dementia-related needs for care, services, and support. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 254
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
57/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.
·
The Gerontologist
·
1997-06-01
This study provides a review and analysis of the empirical research published since 1985 that has examined the impact of race, culture, and/or ethnicity on the dementia caregiving experience. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Under Bronfenbrenner's macrosystem framework, we highlight key quantitative and qualitative studies linking S/SDOH with AD/ADRD, identify scientific gaps in the literature, and propose guidance for future research. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
57/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2024-11-15
(n = 2,392) had a mean age of 74.4 years, 60.4% were female, and 17.1% were of self-reported Black race. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 2,392
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
56/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.
·
The Gerontologist
·
2020-09-01
Relative to white caregivers, blacks more often provided in excess of 40 hr of care per week (54.3% vs 38.6%) and more often cared for an older adult with dementia (27.1% vs 20.7%) who was living below the federal poverty line (31.7% vs 11.9%) or was Medicaid-eligible (42.2% vs 11.8%). 1 key finding →
Participants: 992
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The rural setting presented unique challenges including: low literacy rates (60.1% of participants had no schooling), diverse language use (primarily Giriama and Swahili), limited infrastructure (e.g., 44.8% of households had electricity), restrictive cultural norms that influenced data collection (e.g., in-home interviews were often conducted outdoors with destructions). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 202
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The American Heart Association's LS7 score identified individuals who were vulnerable to multiple chronic nonvascular conditions. 4 key findings →
Participants: 6,506
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
54/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2025-06-05
Of 31 028 older adults in MEPS, 5184 (10%) were African American; 146 (<1%) American Indian or Alaska Native; 1043 (3%) Asian (Indian, Chinese, or Filipino); 5346 (10%) Latino; 690 (2%) Other Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander; and 18 617 (75%) were White. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia (VCID) are characterized by the aging neurovascular unit being confronted with and failing to cope with biological insults due to systemic and cerebral vascular disease, proteinopathy including Alzheimer's biology, metabolic disease, or immune response, resulting in cognitive decline. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The Alzheimer's Association hosted the second Latinos & Alzheimer's Symposium in May 2021. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Significant research gaps remain. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Clinical studies have shown alterations in metabolic profiles when patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease dementia were compared to cognitively normal subjects. 4 key findings →
Participants: 1,534
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated cognitive impairment, a significant cause of morbidity, affects up to 30% of HIV-infected people. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: moderate
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
- Randomized / 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
- Multicenter 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 31,780 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.