56/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 56 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2023-02-08
The sample included 2 619 464 patients (mean [SD] age, 81.3 [8.6] years; 61% women; 87% were White; 8% were Black; 22% with ADRD). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 464
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The average detection rates for mild cognitive impairment is 0.08 (interquartile range=0.00-0.02) for both clinicians and practices, suggesting that only about 8% of expected cases were diagnosed on average. 3 key findings →
Participants: 25
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among 454,508 beneficiaries diagnosed with ADRD in 2017, 250,837 (55%) were in TM and 203,671 (45%) in MA. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Prevalence studies indicate that as many as 50% of older adults experience bothersome pain on a regular basis (Dahlhamer et al., 2018; Galicia-Castillo & Weiner, 2023; Larsson et al., 2017; Lin et al., 2020; Rikard et al., 2023). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 2,041
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
54/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100.
·
Age and Ageing
·
2023-04-01
In-hospital death among nursing home residents with dementia has been associated with poorer quality of end-of-life care. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 240,000
Evidence: high
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
·
2023-05-24
An estimated 2 971 449 individuals (mean age, 66.4 years; 95% CI, 64.8-68.2 years) filled prescriptions for OAB medications in 2019; 2 185 214 (73.5%; 95% CI, 62.6%-84.5%) identified as female, 2 326 901 (78.3%; 95% CI, 66.3%-90.3%) self-identified as non-Hispanic White, 260 685 (8.8%; 95% CI, 5.0%-12.5%) identified as non-Hispanic Black, 167 210 (5.6%; 95% CI, 3.1%-8.2%) identified as Hispanic, 158 507 (5.3%; 95% CI, 2.3%-8.4%) identified as non-Hispanic other race, and 58 147 (2.0%; 95% CI, 0.3%-3.6%) identified as non-Hispanic Asian. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 449
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Lenore Ackerman *Correspondence: David Geffen School of Medicine, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Box 951738, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1738 telephone: 310-794-0206; E-mail Address: [email protected] https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4192-7649 Department of Urology and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003430AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Overactive bladder, including symptoms of increased urinary frequency, urgency, and incontinence, is more prevalent than diabetes, affecting 1 in 6 adults in the United States.1,2 Occurring more commonly among women and older adults, untreated overactive bladder is associated with reduced quality of life, increased incidence of depression and anxiety, increased risk of experiencing falls/fractures, and increased institutionalization. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
51/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.
·
Age and Ageing
·
2023-03-01
of 74,486 decedents (60.5% women; mean age 87.1 years (standard deviation: 7.1)), 82.6% had at least one ED visit in their last year of life. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
51/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.
·
JAMA Health Forum
·
2023-09-15
The 32 796 872 Medicare beneficiaries in the cohort had a mean (SD) age of 74.0 (12.5) years and included 18 228 513 females (55.6%). 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 18
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
51/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.
·
JAMA Health Forum
·
2023-09-15
In this cross-sectional study of the Medicare population with acute and postacute care use, beneficiaries with ADRD had increasing enrollment in the Medicare Advantage program, proportional to the growth in overall enrollment, but their disenrollment from Medicare Advantage in the following year remained higher compared with beneficiaries without ADRD. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 18
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
·
2023-12-15
This cohort study examines rates of new diagnosis of Alzheimer disease and related dementias among beneficiaries of Medicare Advantage plans vs traditional Medicare from 2016 through 2020. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
To ensure diversity, we developed a comprehensive recruitment strategy using a diverse, culturally‐trained staff that includes : • Identifying Dementia Specialists experienced recruiting minorities • Embedding high‐impact community engagement in select regions • Increasing capacity of specialists and PET facilities to engage minorities • Increasing pipeline of referrals to Dementia Specialists • Creating a culturally‐informed awareness campaign Result New IDEAS has enrolled 4,524 participants including 954 (21.1%) Black/African American, and 842 (18.6%) Hispanic/Latinx. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 4,524
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A total of 145 342 adults met inclusion criteria; 10.5% had ADRD and were likely to be older, female, and have more comorbid conditions. 4 key findings →
Participants: 342
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The most important predictors of having a diagnosis of ADRD by the start of care OASIS assessment were a prior discharge diagnosis of ADRD among those admitted from an inpatient setting, and frequently exhibiting symptoms of confusion. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
PLWD proactively enrolled in a dementia care program have high baseline rates of behavioral issues and their caregivers have elevated depression and stress scores. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 195
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Diagnostic pathways for patients presenting with cognitive complaints may vary across geographies. 1 key finding →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 6,744
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Approximately half of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage (MA), a private plan alternative to traditional Medicare (TM). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The results of the study and the submission of a manuscript for peer review are expected in June 2024. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, supply and demand forcast models predicted significant nursing shortages across the United States through 2030 due to both an aging patient population and nursing workforce.1, 2 However, during the pandemic, we saw an exodus of younger nurses in addition to early retirements. 5 key findings →
Participants: 100
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Early-diagnosed patients (N = 421) have a lower utilization rate of inpatient skilled nursing facility, nursing home and hospitalization than late-diagnosed patients (N = 2817) after being diagnosed with AD. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 421
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In this study on Medicare patients with AF, Black race, low-income subsidy, and dual eligibility were found to be associated with delayed OAC initiation, suggesting potential disparities in the care of AF with timely OAC treatment. 5 key findings →
Participants: 446,441
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The study population of 99,774 individuals had a mean age of 71.0 years and was 49.1% female, 73.9% White, and 17.8% Black, with 62.0% living in an urban setting. 5 key findings →
Participants: 99,774
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The number of individuals with anorexia ranged from 317,964 to 328,977 per year, a mean annual prevalence rate of 1.1%. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Caregiving for a parent living with dementia (PLWD) shapes former caregivers’ personal health planning. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We enrolled 195 patients in the CARES dementia care program. 3 key findings →
Participants: 195
Evidence: low
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
- 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.