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
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
81/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100.
·
Gastroenterology
·
2019-05-29
In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 8,791
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
·
2020-02-01
Of 544 eligible participants (241 women and 303 men), the mean (SD) age was 74.3 (8.2) years, and the mean (SD) sMMSE score was 26.4 (1.9). 1 key finding →
Participants: 554
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Main results We included 39 trials that recruited 16,082 participants, assessing 22 different interventions or comparisons. 4 key findings →
Participants: 39
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
77/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100.
·
PLoS medicine
·
2019-07-23
With no effective treatments for cognitive decline or dementia, improving the evidence base for modifiable risk factors is a research priority. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 48,522
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Vascular cognitive impairment (VCI) describes a broad spectrum of cognitive impairments caused by cerebrovascular disease, ranging from mild cognitive impairment to dementia. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 2,193
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
77/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100.
·
PLoS Medicine
·
2015-03-31
Points• UK Biobank is a very large and detailed prospective study with over 500,000 participants aged 40-69 years when recruited in 2006-2010.• The study has collected and continues to collect extensive phenotypic and genotypic detail about its participants, including data from questionnaires, physical measures, sample assays, accelerometry, multimodal imaging, genome-wide genotyping and longitudinal follow-up for a wide range of health-related outcomes.• Wide consultation; input from scientific, management, legal, and ethical partners; and industrial-scale, centralised processes have been essential to the development of this resource.• UK Biobank is available for open access, without the need for collaboration, to any bona fide researcher who wishes to use it to conduct health-related research for the benefit of the public. 1 key finding →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 500,000
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
76/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 76 out of 100.
·
BMJ
·
2024-04-17
Antipsychotic use compared with non-use in adults with dementia was associated with increased risks of stroke, venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, heart failure, fracture, pneumonia, and acute kidney injury, but not ventricular arrhythmia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 173,910
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
76/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 76 out of 100.
·
PLoS medicine
·
2017-03-21
We also determined the extent to which sex, educational attainment, and apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (APOE*4) carrier status were associated with decline. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 42,170
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Supported by very low-to-moderate certainty of evidence, physical activity/exercise has a positive effect on several cognitive and noncognitive outcomes in people with MCI and dementia, but RCTs, with low risk of bias/confounding, are still needed to confirm these relationships. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 28,205
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.
·
BMC Medicine
·
2023-03-14
Higher adherence to a MedDiet was associated with lower dementia risk, independent of genetic risk, underlining the importance of diet in dementia prevention interventions. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 60,298
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The association between BMI and dementia is likely to be attributable to two different processes: a harmful effect of higher BMI, which is observable in long follow-up, and a reverse-causation effect that makes a higher BMI to appear protective when the follow-up is short. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 6,894
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
White matter hyperintensities are frequent on neuroimaging of older people and are a key feature of cerebral small vessel disease. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 4,006
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Main results Nine studies (from eight published reports) of 5149 individuals with mild cognitive impairment (however defined) were included in the review. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 5,149
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The literature has several methodological limitations including lack of sufficient algorithm development descriptions and standard definitions. 1 key finding →
Participants: 255
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
71/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100.
·
Stroke
·
2020-06-10
Periventricular white matter hyperintensities (WMH; PVWMH) and deep WMH (DWMH) are regional classifications of WMH and reflect proposed differences in cause. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 26,654
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.
·
Neurology
·
2025-03-10
We analyzed 1,240 MRIs from 473 patients (age: 69.2 ± 7.4 [range: 49-87]; 32.8% women). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,240
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 psychiatry
·
2017-03-01
There were 987 participants (290 from Vantaa 85+, 241 from the Cambridge City Over-75s Cohort, and 456 from the Cognitive Function and Ageing Study) with neuropathologic data; mean (SD) age at death was 90 (6.4) years, including 682 women (69%). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 987
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.
·
Nature medicine
·
2024-08-26
Brain clocks, which quantify discrepancies between brain age and chronological age, hold promise for understanding brain health and disease. 4 key findings →
Participants: 5,306
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We identified 4 novel genetic loci that implicate inflammatory and glial proliferative pathways in the development of WMH in addition to previously proposed ischemic mechanisms. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 17
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.
·
BMC geriatrics
·
2016-10-12
Studies varied widely in size and quality and therefore we must be circumspect in our conclusions. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 60
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
However, some individuals have subtle symptoms associated with acute MRI lesions. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 21
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.