87/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 87 out of 100.
·
Diabetes care
·
2015-12-17
Study-level data from 14 studies, 2,310,330 individuals, and 102,174 dementia case patients were included. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 2,310,330
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
82/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2020-07-01
The incidence rate of dementia in Europe and North America has declined by 13% per decade over the past 25 years, consistently across studies. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 49,202
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
81/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100.
·
JAMA Psychiatry
·
2023-06-01
Further studies are warranted to develop and refine the specific MIND diet for different populations. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 224,049
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.
·
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
Over a long period of observation, no evidence was found that a specific AHM drug class was more effective than others in lowering risk of dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 31
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
73/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 73 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2023-02-21
In this exploratory analysis, the APOE ε3[R145C] missense variant was associated with an increased risk of AD among individuals of African ancestry with the ε3/ε4 genotype. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control
Participants: 31,929
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Midlife and late-life risk factors contributed to 22.7% and 16.5% of total dementia cases, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 37,931
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Circulating NfL and GFAP may, independently and jointly, provide useful clinical insight regarding dementia risk and prognosis. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 1,712
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
·
2019-05-01
Among the 1453 participants in the Framingham dementia study sample, the mean (SD) age was 75 (7) years; 792 (54.5%) were female. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,453
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.
·
Neurology
·
2011-08-01
Our aim was to test the association of vascular risk factor exposure in midlife with progression of MRI markers of brain aging and measures of cognitive decline. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,352
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
White matter hyperintensities (WMH) are the most common brain-imaging feature of cerebral small vessel disease (SVD), hypertension being the main known risk factor. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2022-02-07
Over 10 years of close clinical dementia surveillance in this cohort study, loneliness was associated with increased dementia risk; this tripled in adults whose baseline risk would otherwise be relatively low on the basis of age and genetic risk, representing a majority of the US population. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,308
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2022-05-02
Compared with no sensory impairment, DSI was associated with increased risk of all-cause dementia (hazard ratio [HR], 2.60; 95% CI, 1.66-2.06; P Conclusions and relevance In this cohort study, DSI was associated with increased risk of dementia, particularly AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 5,888
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Cancer survivors had a lower risk of Alzheimer's disease than those without cancer, and patients with Alzheimer's disease had a lower risk of incident cancer. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,278
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among participants in the Framingham Heart Study, the incidence of dementia has declined over the course of three decades. 3 key findings →
Participants: 5,205
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
An increased plasma homocysteine level is a strong, independent risk factor for the development of dementia and Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 1,092
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The study encompassed 284 cases with dementia and 1080 controls. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
JAMA Neurology
·
2023-12-01
From the 868 Framingham Heart Study participants who returned for a second PSG, this cohort included 346 participants with a mean age of 69 years (range, 60-87 years); 179 (52%) were female. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 346
Evidence: early
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
PLoS medicine
·
2017-03-28
Fasting lipid fractions (triglycerides [TGs], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], total cholesterol [TC]) were studied as continuous variables, and results are reported per SD increase of each lipid fraction. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 9,294
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2007-11-01
Atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and angina were associated with a greater rate of decline and may represent modifiable risk factors for secondary prevention in Alzheimer disease. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 135
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2017-11-08
Elevated blood pressure during midlife, persistence of elevated blood pressure into late life, and, among nonhypertensives, a steep decline in blood pressure during mid- to late life were associated with an increased dementia risk in a community-based cohort. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,440
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.
·
Neurology
·
2025-06-27
Among eligible participants (n = 705,061), 264,294 individuals (37.5% of eligible participants) initiated any statin during 2001-2010 ("initiators"), of whom 249,613 (94.4%) were matched with 255,937 unique noninitiators to create the analytic sample (322,358 unique participants; mean age at baseline = 67.4 years; 55.1% female). 3 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 322,358
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among older Medicare beneficiaries, incident AF is common and has remained relatively stable for more than a decade. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 433,123
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.
·
Neurology
·
1997-12-01
We estimated the remaining lifetime risks of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia from all causes, based on data from longitudinal population studies. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 198
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
65/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2023-10-02
In this study, terminating metformin treatment was associated with increased dementia incidence. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 41,346
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
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 31,380 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.