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
85/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 85 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2020-05-19
In this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, blood pressure lowering with antihypertensive agents compared with control was significantly associated with a lower risk of incident dementia or cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 96,158
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
85/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 85 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2019-02-28
Risk for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD), the most prevalent dementia, is partially driven by genetics. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 94,437
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Homozygous loss-of-function mutations in TREM2, encoding the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 protein, have previously been associated with an autosomal recessive form of early-onset dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 1,092
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
84/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 84 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2015-05-01
Among persons without dementia, the prevalence of cerebral amyloid pathology as determined by positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid findings was associated with age, APOE genotype, and presence of cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 2,914
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.
·
JAMA
·
2015-05-01
The likelihood of amyloid positivity was associated with age and APOE ε4 status. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 377
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.
·
Nature genetics
·
2011-04-03
The Alzheimer Disease Genetics Consortium (ADGC) performed a genome-wide association study of late-onset Alzheimer disease using a three-stage design consisting of a discovery stage (stage 1) and two replication stages (stages 2 and 3). 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
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
The core biomarkers differentiated Alzheimer's disease from controls with good performance: CSF T-tau (average ratio 2·54, 95% CI 2·44-2·64, p Interpretation The core CSF biomarkers of neurodegeneration (T-tau, P-tau, and Aβ42), CSF NFL, and plasma T-tau were strongly associated with Alzheimer's disease and the core biomarkers were strongly associated with mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 699
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a public health priority for the 21st century. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 74,046
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In analyses that addressed bias due to reverse causation, physical inactivity was not associated with all-cause dementia or Alzheimer's disease, although an indication of excess dementia risk was observed in a subgroup of physically inactive individuals who developed cardiometabolic disease. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 404
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Prevention of cognitive impairment and dementia is an important public health goal. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 11,140
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
80/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 80 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2024-02-05
In this meta-analysis of the association of physical activity with cognitive decline, physical activity was associated with better late-life cognition, but the association was weak. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 341,471
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The first single-stage individual patient data meta-analysis from randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trials provides evidence to support benefits of antihypertensive treatment in late-mid and later life to lower the risk of dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 28,008
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Older people with SMC but no objective complaints are twice as likely to develop dementia as individuals without SMC. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 15,009
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
80/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 80 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2023-07-03
Good sleep is essential for health, yet associations between sleep and dementia risk remain incompletely understood. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 5,946
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
80/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 80 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2021-09-07
Late-onset Alzheimer's disease is a prevalent age-related polygenic disease that accounts for 50-70% of dementia cases. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
80/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 80 out of 100.
·
Nature medicine
·
2023-06-15
Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) is a premalignant expansion of mutated hematopoietic stem cells. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 1,362
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2024-08-14
Antihypertensive use was associated with decreased AD but not non-AD risk throughout late life. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 31,250
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
JAMA Neurology
·
2023-02-01
In this meta-analysis, the usage of hearing restorative devices by participants with hearing loss was associated with a 19% decrease in hazards of long-term cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 137,484
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2026-07-13
The double-cutoff approach revealed high confidence for interpreting scans as negative when Centiloid values were lower than 11 (95% CI, 9-13; I2 = 95%) and interpreting scans as positive if Centiloid values were higher than 26 (95% CI, 24-28; I2 = 95%). 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 49,227
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
APOE ɛ4, the most significant genetic risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD), may mask effects of other loci. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 4,203
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We aimed to present the first detailed analysis of the global prevalence, mortality, and overall burden of dementia as captured by the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study 2016, and highlight the most important messages for clinicians and neurologists. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2019-01-01
Of 2846 articles identified, 94 studies were eligible, with up to 14 529 participants for WMH, 16 012 participants for BI, 15 693 participants for CMB, and 4587 participants for PVS. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 529
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2022-06-01
The findings suggest that risk factors associated with ADRDs have changed over the past decade and differ based on sex and race and ethnicity. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 378
Evidence: high
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 27,380 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.