These findings suggest that a hearing intervention might reduce cognitive change over 3 years in populations of older adults at increased risk for cognitive decline but not in populations at decreased risk for cognitive decline. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 858
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
ACHIEVE-P sets the stage for the full-scale ACHIEVE trial (N = 850, recruitment beginning November 2017), the first randomized trial to determine efficacy of a best practices hearing (vs. successful aging) intervention on reducing cognitive decline in older adults with HL. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 850
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2017-10-01
Midlife vascular risk factors are associated with increased risk of dementia in black and white ARIC Study participants. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 744
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
73/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 73 out of 100.
·
The Lancet
·
2023-09-02
This randomized trial gave hearing aids plus counseling, or only general health education, to 977 older adults with untreated hearing loss, then tracked cognition for three years. 4 key findings →
Design: RCT
Participants: 977
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
When completed in 2022, Aging and Cognitive Health Evaluation in Elders study should provide definitive evidence of the effect of hearing treatment versus education control on cognitive decline in community-dwelling older adults with mild-to-moderate hearing impairment. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
1997-03-01
The prediction algorithms are a first but promising step toward providing specific prognoses to patients, families, and practitioners. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 236
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
65/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2024-12-26
This study examined whether levels of blood biomarkers of amyloid (Aβ 42 /Aβ 40 ratio), tau (p-tau 181 ), neurodegeneration (NfL), and glial activation and neuroinflammation (glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], YKL40, soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 [sTREM2]) collected when participants were cognitively normal are associated with the time to onset of MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 271
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The temporal evolutions and relative orderings of Alzheimer disease biomarkers, including CSF amyloid-β42 (Aβ42), Aβ40, total tau (Tau) and phosphorylated tau181 (pTau181), standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) from the molecular imaging of cerebral fibrillar amyloid-β with PET using the 11C-Pittsburgh Compound-B (PiB), MRI-based hippocampal volume and cortical thickness and cognition have been hypothesized but not yet fully tested with longitudinal data for all major biomarker modalities among cognitively normal individuals across the adult lifespan starting from 18 years. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 2,609
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
64/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2011-04-13
AD-signature cortical thinning in CN-AD converters in both samples was remarkably similar, about 0.2 mm (p 1). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
64/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2022-10-01
This study aimed to examine whether baseline CSF measures of Alzheimer disease (AD)-related pathology are associated with the time to onset of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and whether these associations differ by age, sex, Apolipoprotein E ( ApoE4 ) status, and proximal (≤7 years) vs distal (>7 years) time to symptom onset. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 273
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
63/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 63 out of 100.
·
Diabetes care
·
2019-05-21
Diabetes status, poor glycemic control, and longer diabetes duration were associated with worse cognitive outcomes over a median follow-up of 5 years. 4 key findings →
Participants: 5,099
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
From a longitudinal study of normal (Clinical Dementia Rating [CDR] = 0; n = 77) and mildly impaired (CDR = 0.5; n = 167) participants with 5 or more annual clinical assessments, baseline level of cognitive impairment in daily life was graded using CDR sum of boxes (CDR-SB) and level of cognitive performance impairment was graded using neuropsychological test scores. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 77
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
High WMH was a predictor of progression from normal to MCI (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-8.17; P= .01) but not conversion from MCI to all-cause dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 67
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
61/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2020-10-23
Of 9,033 ARIC participants with sufficient Medicare coverage data (4,980 [55.1%] female, 1993 [22.1%] Black), 671 met the definition of LOE. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2016-06-01
These results suggest that, to optimize observing a treatment effect, clinical trials enrolling cognitively normal individuals should selectively recruit participants with abnormal levels of both amyloid and tau (ie, stage 2) because this group would be expected to show the greatest cognitive decline over time if untreated. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The new criteria for AD are presented in three documents. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
57/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2004-03-01
These data support distinct processes in the initiation and progression of AD pathology within the temporal cortex: Deposition of Abeta reaches a "ceiling" early in the disease process, whereas NFT formation, synaptic loss, and gliosis continue throughout the course of the illness. 1 key finding →
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
An international group of clinical and basic scientists participated in the Frontotemporal Dementia and Pick's Disease Criteria Conference at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md, on July 7, 2000, to reassess clinical and neuropathological criteria for the diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
53/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2020-09-01
Cross-sectional data, including CSF analytes, molecular imaging of cerebral fibrillar β-amyloid (Aβ) with PET using the [ 11 C] benzothiazole tracer Pittsburgh compound B (PiB), MRI-based brain structures, and clinical/cognitive outcomes harmonized from 8 studies, collectively involving 3,284 cognitively normal individuals 18 to 101 years of age, were analyzed. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Markers of lower socioeconomic status predict risk of developing incident AD. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
51/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 51 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2008-07-30
These results demonstrate that temporoparietal regions show differential rates of atrophy on MRI during prodromal Alzheimer disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Participants: 66
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
50/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 50 out of 100.
·
Stroke
·
2017-10-10
CMBs are a common vascular pathology in the elderly. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The results suggest that the hippocampus and the temporal horn of the lateral ventricles may be useful as antemortem markers of AD in mildly impaired patients. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Recent studies indicate that impairments in two cognitive domains characterize the cognitive abnormalities that appear earliest in the course of Alzheimer disease (AD). 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The clinical hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a gradual decline in cognitive function. 1 key finding →
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
- 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 27,780 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.