Among persons with early Alzheimer's disease, the use of gantenerumab led to a lower amyloid plaque burden than placebo at 116 weeks but was not associated with slower clinical decline. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 980
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Solanezumab, which targets monomeric amyloid in persons with elevated brain amyloid levels, did not slow cognitive decline as compared with placebo over a period of 240 weeks in persons with preclinical Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 1,169
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
These results indicate a strong association between WMH and MCH, a common manifestation of cerebral amyloid angiopathy and ARIA-H. These results suggest that increased WMH volume may represent an early sign of vessel amyloidosis, likely prior to the emergence of MCH. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
77/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2020-09-01
No clinically important adverse events were associated with treatment. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 432
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In a large cohort of cognitively unimpaired individuals enrolled in a Phase 3 clinical trial and companion observational study, these findings confirm that higher baseline levels of amyloid and tau markers are associated with increased rates of cognitive decline and progression to functional impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 583
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2020-12-01
Compared with participants who learned that they had a not elevated amyloid result, individuals who learned of an elevated amyloid result were no more likely to experience short-term increases in depression (mean [SD] change in the Geriatric Depression Scale score, 0.02 [1.3] vs 0.04 [1.3]; P = .90), anxiety (mean [SD] change in State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score, -0.02 [3.2] vs -0.15 [3.0]; P = .65), or suicidality (mean [SD] change in the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale score, 0.0 [0.4] vs -0.01 [0.5]; P = .67). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,167
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.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2021-03-01
change from baseline in Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite score. 5 key findings →
Participants: 189
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.
·
JAMA
·
2017-06-01
Among the 445 participants (243 with normal amyloid, 202 with elevated amyloid), mean (SD) age was 74.0 (5.9) years, mean education was 16.4 (2.7) years, and 52% were women. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 243
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
JAMA Neurology
·
2025-10-01
Levels of plasma p-tau217 increased significantly in Aβ+ participants before showing significant deceleration (χ2 = 21.7; P Conclusions and relevance This study found that tau PET is valuable for both prognostic and real-time tracking of disease progression. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 1,707
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2020-06-01
The large number of participants screened with amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) and standardized assessments provides an unprecedented opportunity to evaluate factors associated with elevated brain amyloid. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 4,486
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2025-05-29
Higher tau levels are associated with the fastest decline in everyday functioning in the presence of elevated amyloid, and those accumulating more tau show a faster decline in everyday functioning. 3 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 434
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2009-12-30
The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative has successfully recruited cohorts of cognitively normal subjects, subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and subjects with Alzheimer disease with anticipated baseline characteristics. 1 key finding →
Participants: 819
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2015-04-01
At 48 months, group differences between clinical progressors and non-progressors were significant for self (2.13, SE=0.45, P Conclusions and relevance Demonstrating long-term clinical benefit will be critical for the success of recently launched secondary prevention trials. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 468
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2019-10-01
Statistically significant effects of AZD0530 treatment were not found on relative CMRgl reduction in an Alzheimer disease-associated region of interest or on secondary clinical or biomarker measures. 3 key findings →
Participants: 159
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
65/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2014-08-01
In ADNI, Aβ-positive participants showed more decline than did Aβ-negative participants with regard to the ADCS-PACC score at 24 months (mean [SE] difference, -1.239 [0.522] [95% CI, -2.263 to -0.215]; P = .02). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
There were no statistical differences between the placebo or solanezumab groups in CDR-G, CDR-SB, specific CDR boxes or CDR composite scores over the course of the trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 583
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Regions with early signs of elevated amyloid β uptake were used to form an early, focal composite and compared to a commonly used global composite, in a separate validation sample. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 279
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Both participant and study partner CFI increased over the duration of the study indicating worsening cognitive functioning. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,147
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The Clinical Core of the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) has provided clinical, operational, and data management support to ADNI since its inception. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 800
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
ARIA-E is rare in cognitively unimpaired Aβ+ and Aβ- populations prior to anti-amyloid drug intervention. 4 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 1,250
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Sensitive detection of cognitive decline over the course of preclinical Alzheimer's disease is critical as the field moves toward secondary prevention trials. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
These findings provide support for both the feasibility and validity of C3 and computerized cognitive outcomes more generally in AD secondary prevention trials. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 4,486
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Participants age 60-85 years deemed cognitively unimpaired were disclosed an elevated or not elevated brain amyloid result by a certified clinician. 5 key findings →
Participants: 3,686
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Eligibility to randomize into the A3 Trial or A45 Trial is based on the screening PET imaging results. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The poor generalizability of clinical research data due to the enrollment of highly educated, non-Latinx White participants hampers the development of therapies for Alzheimer's disease (AD). 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 27,380 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.