Of 1648 patients with COVID-19 admitted to 38 hospitals, 398 (24.2%) died during hospitalization and 1250 (75.8%) survived. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 1,648
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
83/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 83 out of 100.
·
JMIR aging
·
2021-04-12
Our results highlight the need for adequate isolation and protective measures. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 135
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
More than 25% of the U.S. population aged ≥ 65 years has diabetes mellitus (hereafter referred to as diabetes),1 and the aging of the overall population is a significant driver of the diabetes epidemic. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 1,000
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Higher all-cause mortality was observed among apparently healthy older adults who received daily aspirin than among those who received placebo and was attributed primarily to cancer-related death. 3 key findings →
Participants: 19,114
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The need for large sample sizes has led to collaborative efforts, such as the Prospective Studies Collaboration (an individual participant meta-analysis of data from 61 studies and more than a million participants11) that has demonstrated conclusively that a continuous increase in blood pressure corresponds with an increased risk of vascular death across all age groups (see Figure 1 that illustrates the importance of a large sample size (about 500 000 participants) for detecting this association).12 Sample size is also of particular importance in the current era of genome-wide association studies, where many investigations are aiming to detect either small effects from common variants or large effects from rare variants.13 Absolute risk of ischaemic heart disease mortality by usual systolic blood pressure and age at risk in 5000, 50 000, and 500 000 participants. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 5,200
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Between Aug 23, 2010, and Nov 25, 2014, 326 men were enrolled, of whom 163 were randomly assigned to radical retropubic prostatectomy and 163 to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. 18 withdrew (12 assigned to radical retropubic prostatectomy and six assigned to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy); thus, 151 in the radical retropubic prostatectomy group proceeded to surgery and 157 in the robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy group. 121 assigned to radical retropubic prostatectomy completed the 12 week questionnaire versus 131 assigned to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 14
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Prior work has shown that the video component significantly contributes to quality and satisfaction of the visit.3 In addition to the technology itself, patients need to know what to expect for their telehealth appointments. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 5,000
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Letters16 October 2007Adjusted-Dose Warfarin versus Aspirin for Preventing Stroke in Patients with Atrial FibrillationRobert G. The study's important results indicate that the relative efficacy and safety of warfarin for stroke prevention can be extended to very elderly patients who are managed by nonspecialists. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 973
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
As a result, kidney disease has been largely overlooked by health authorities and governments in most countries [9]. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
71/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100.
·
Pharmacotherapy
·
2018-09-04
Study objective To examine the risks and compare the occurrences of major long-term side effects (sexual dysfunction, bone fractures, diabetes, cardiovascular morbidity, acute myocardial infarction [MI], and dementia) in patients with prostate cancer who received androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) with those who did not. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 201,797
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
71/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2016-10-19
Our findings demonstrate the importance of community-based patient-centered care strategies for stroke survivors that address their range of health needs and prevent more costly acute care use. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 29,673
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Of note, dramatic progress has been made in recent years in diabetes research and clinical practice, which includes approval of antidiabetic agents with novel mechanisms of action along with publication of clinical trial results with these drugs, and novel diagnostic and therapeutic devices, such as continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and sensor augmented pumps (SAP). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
LASI is India’s first ageing study and the world’s largest in terms of sample size, and will provide comprehensive longitudinal data for designing policies and programmes targeted toward the overall well-being of the older population. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 250
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
These three main clusers were confirmed in a testing sample. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 9,804
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We found little evidence to support wide-ranging effects of statins on health outcomes beyond their established beneficial effect on vascular disease. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 129,288
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2013-08-01
Healthy life expectancy (HALE) was used to summarize overall population health, accounting for both length of life and levels of ill health experienced at different ages. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
NIHR Open Res
·
2026-10-29
The PROMPPT trial will assess whether review by trained clinical pharmacists working in general practices can support safe opioid reduction without compromising pain management and quality of life. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Among older Medicare beneficiaries with heart failure, there is a higher overall burden of comorbidity and greater prevalence of discordant comorbidity among the oldest old. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 201,130
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Brief Report15 September 1991Postmenopausal Estrogen and Prevention BiasElizabeth Barrett-Connor, MDElizabeth Barrett-Connor, MDAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-115-6-455 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptIn the last decade many investigators reported that postmenopausal women taking estrogen were at reduced risk for cardiovascular disease compared with women not taking estrogen (1). 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The findings of this large cohort study suggest that system-level measurement and reporting of specific low-value services is feasible, enables cross-system comparisons, and reveals a broad range of low-value care use. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2022-08-01
Men, racial and ethnic minority individuals, older adults, and those with language barriers are at increased risk for undertreatment of depression. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Ankylosing spondylitis is associated with increased risk for vascular mortality. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 473
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
64/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100.
·
Medical care
·
2014-08-01
Social Security and Medicare actuaries should account for the growing number of beneficiaries with multiple chronic conditions when determining population projections and trust fund solvency. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,372,272
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We identified several subgroups of the population who are particularly susceptible to temperature extremes, including persons with atrial fibrillation. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Even in persons who are currently nondisabled, a simple measure of lower extremity performance is predictive of subsequent hospitalization, especially for geriatric conditions. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 3,381
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
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.