As outlined in the original cohort profile,1 The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA) is a prospective cohort study designed to provide an evidence base for addressing the challenges and opportunities associated with population ageing in Ireland. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,525
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2024-05-01
Of 92 383 participants, 60 582 (65.6%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 56.4 (8.0) years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 92,383
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
·
2022-07-27
In this prospective cohort study, higher consumption of UPF was associated with higher risk of dementia, whereas substituting unprocessed or minimally processed foods for UPF was associated with lower risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 72,083
Evidence: moderate
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 Neurology
·
2022-10-01
In this cohort study, a higher number of steps was associated with lower risk of all-cause dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 78,430
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
·
2024-09-18
In this nationwide population-based study, SGLT2i use significantly reduced the risks of neurodegenerative disorders in patients with type 2 diabetes independent of various factors including comorbidities and bioclinical parameters. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 358,862
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The results of this cohort study suggest that hearing loss was associated with increased dementia risk, especially among people not using hearing aids, suggesting that hearing aids might prevent or delay the onset and progression of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 573,088
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Using datasets from a wide range of geographical regions, we found that both early life education and adulthood occupational complexity were independently predictive of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 10,195
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Sleep apnea (SA) is potentially a modifiable risk factor for dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 1,333,424
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
The negative association between depression treatment and incident dementia was significant in the increasing and chronically low courses, highlighting the necessity of timely interventional strategies before depression progresses to a chronically severe state. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 354,313
Evidence: moderate
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 network open
·
2023-01-03
Of 6256 participants (3402 women [54.4%]; mean [SD] age at baseline, 61.7 [6.6] years), 510 received an all-cause dementia diagnosis within 17 years of baseline. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 766
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
·
2022-10-19
Overall, 2,277 individuals had at least 1 baseline blood biomarker available (n = 357 for CSF subsample, n = 649 for PET subsample), among whom 257 were diagnosed with clinical AD/mixed dementia during follow-up. 2 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 357
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
·
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
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.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2019-02-01
Dementia was associated with mortality in 70% of older adults with DS. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 300
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
We found no evidence to suggest that the current assumption of constant age-specific prevalence of dementia over time is ill-founded. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
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 neurology
·
2016-04-01
The patients receiving regular PPI medication (n = 2950; mean [SD] age, 83.8 [5.4] years; 77.9% female) had a significantly increased risk of incident dementia compared with the patients not receiving PPI medication (n = 70,729; mean [SD] age, 83.0 [5.6] years; 73.6% female) (hazard ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.36-1.52]; P Conclusions and relevance The avoidance of PPI medication may prevent the development of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,950
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 neurology
·
2018-09-01
In this cohort study of more than 350 000 veterans, even mild TBI without LOC was associated with more than a 2-fold increase in the risk of dementia diagnosis. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 178
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
·
2005-05-01
High cholesterol in late life was associated with decreased dementia risk, which is in contrast to previous studies suggesting high cholesterol in mid-life is a risk factor for later dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 392
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Increasing crystallised intelligence and fruit and vegetable consumption and eliminating depression and diabetes are likely to have the biggest impact on reducing the incidence of dementia, outweighing even the effect of removing the principal known genetic risk factor. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,433
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Socioeconomic differences in dementia risk can be partly explained by differences in modifiable health conditions and lifestyle factors. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 6,346
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
·
2002-02-01
These results suggest that frequent participation in cognitively stimulating activities is associated with reduced risk of AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 111
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Existing studies have included a narrow range of infectious diseases, relied on short follow-up periods, and provided little evidence for whether the increased risk is limited to specific dementia subtypes or attributable to specific microbes rather than infection burden. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 490
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
This study provides a quantitative synthesis of the prospective associations between personality traits (neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness) and the risk of incident Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 30,036
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 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
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.