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
Dementia represents a substantial financial burden on society, one that is similar to the financial burden of heart disease and cancer. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 856
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
75/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 75 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2021-02-01
Among 34 349 participants, 26 088 who self-reported Black or White race, were free of stroke and dementia, and had covariate data at or before the first cognitive assessment were included for analysis. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 349
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.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2022-12-01
The mean (SD) age of the study population sample (N = 3496) was 76.4 (7.6) years, and 2095 participants (60%) were female. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 3,496
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.
·
JAMA psychiatry
·
2015-05-01
Compared with respective matched nonusers, individuals receiving haloperidol had an increased mortality risk of 3.8% (95% CI, 1.0%-6.6%; P Conclusions and relevance The absolute effect of antipsychotics on mortality in elderly patients with dementia may be higher than previously reported and increases with dose. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 90,786
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.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2015-03-01
This study showed that flutemetamol injection labeled with radioactive fluorine 18 was safe and had high sensitivity and specificity in an end-of-life population. 3 key findings →
Design: open-label trial
Participants: 176
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Parietal cortex RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) data were generated from individuals with and without Alzheimer disease (AD; n control = 13; n AD = 83) from the Knight Alzheimer Disease Research Center (Knight ADRC). 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Cognitive impairment without dementia is more prevalent in the United States than dementia, and its subtypes vary in prevalence and outcomes. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Distinguishing Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD) currently relies on a clinical history and examination, but positron emission tomography with [(18)F] fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) shows different patterns of hypometabolism in these disorders that might aid differential diagnosis. 5 key findings →
Participants: 31
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
62/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100.
·
Neuroepidemiology
·
2007-10-29
Dementia prevalence estimates from this first nationally representative population-based study of dementia in the USA to include subjects from all regions of the country can provide essential information for effective planning for the impending healthcare needs of the large and increasing number of individuals at risk for dementia as our population ages. 1 key finding →
Participants: 856
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2009-10-01
Different biomarkers for Alzheimer disease provide different information from one another that is likely to be complementary. 1 key finding →
Participants: 34
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
Neuroepidemiology
·
2005-08-15
Linking the ADAMS dementia clinical assessment data to the wealth of available longitudinal HRS data on health, health care utilization, informal care, and economic resources and behavior, will provide a unique opportunity to study the onset of CIND and dementia in a nationally representative population-based sample, as well as the risk factors, prevalence, outcomes, and costs of CIND and dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 856
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
This study investigated cerebral glucose metabolism in very early Alzheimer's disease, before a clinical diagnosis of probable Alzheimer's disease is possible, using [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. 3 key findings →
Participants: 66
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
BMJ Open
·
2025-08-01
Fit of the models to the data was adequate for general cognitive performance (root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA)=0.03; comparative fit index (CFI)=0.94; standardised root mean residual (SRMR)=0.05), language (RMSEA=0.02; CFI=0.95; SRMR=0.05) and good for memory (RMSEA=0.05; CFI=0.99; SRMR=0.02) and executive functioning (RMSEA=0.03; CFI=0.98; SRMR=0.03). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 5,878
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We observed high levels of missing data in most cognitive test items - on average 13% and as high as 65%. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 9,755
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The rural setting presented unique challenges including: low literacy rates (60.1% of participants had no schooling), diverse language use (primarily Giriama and Swahili), limited infrastructure (e.g., 44.8% of households had electricity), restrictive cultural norms that influenced data collection (e.g., in-home interviews were often conducted outdoors with destructions). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 202
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Our study estimates the sensitivity and specificity of Medicare claims to identify clinically-diagnosed dementia, and documents how errors in dementia assessment affect dementia cost estimates. 4 key findings →
Participants: 758
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Cognitive status was determined for 5414 participants, with a dementia prevalence of 8.9% when assessed at a mean age of 81 years. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 5,414
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Cognitive assessment appropriate for diagnosis of dementia and CIND in large population surveys could be improved with more targeted information from informants and additional cognitive tests targeting other areas of brain function. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
When applied post hoc to an existing population, the Mini-Cog was as effective in detecting dementia as longer screening and assessment instruments. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
TabCAT tests showed good convergent validity with traditional pen-and-paper tests. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 146
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
These lessons emphasize the importance of ensuring tests are feasible across both high-income countries and LMICs, maintaining consistency within studies and over time, and designing comprehensive cognitive batteries for improved measurement precision of general and domain-specific phenotypes. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Recommendations for HCAP adaptation include phases of preparation (assembling local expert teams; resource planning), implementation (construct-centered adaptation guided by local experts), pre-testing (iterative, mixed-methods approach), and field preparation (creating documentation; interviewer training; planning for ongoing quality assurance). 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Study-specific algorithms yielded comparable dementia prevalence estimates: 10.8 % in NHATS and 11.1 % in HRS-HCAP. 5 key findings →
Participants: 5,696
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
To balance high-quality measurement of cognitive domains and maintain the ability to perform meaningful cross-national comparisons, each HCAP should include a common set of at least three to four continuously distributed test items per domain that can link domains across studies. 5 key findings →
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 31,380 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.