Fewer than half of the older adults dispensed donepezil in Ontario would have been eligible to participate in the RCTs that established the efficacy of this drug. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 3,423
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Where appropriate, we undertook subgroup analysis by modality (individual versus group), number of sessions and frequency, setting (community versus care home), type of control condition and dementia severity. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 37
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Deep learning, a state-of-the-art machine learning approach, has shown outstanding performance over traditional machine learning in identifying intricate structures in complex high-dimensional data, especially in the domain of computer vision. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
Brain informatics
·
2024-04-05
Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) has gained much interest in recent years for its ability to explain the complex decision-making process of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) models. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
There has been growing evidence showing gait variability provides unique information about gait characteristics in neurological disorders. 1 key finding →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 777
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Resting-state fMRI (rs-fMRI) detects functional connectivity (FC) abnormalities that occur in the brains of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Our results revealed machine learning with novel biomarkers and multiple variables may increase the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosis of AD. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We performed a systematic review of studies focusing on the automatic prediction of the progression of mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia, and a quantitative analysis of the methodological choices impacting performance. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 172
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Promising results are reported across nearly all 51 studies, but very few have been implemented in clinical research or practice. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
This meta-analysis provides evidence that poor gait performance predicts dementia. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
On meta-analysis, PARO had no ST or LT compared to UC or AC over 5-12 weeks on agitation (ST vs UC, 4 trials, 153 participants: pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.25; - 0.57 to 0.06; LT vs UC; 2 trials, 77 participants, SMD = -0.24; - 0.94, 0.46), cognition (ST vs UC, 3 trials, 128 participants: SMD= 0.03; -0.32, 0.38), overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (ST vs UC, 3 trials, 169 participants: SMD= -0.01; -0.32, 0.29; ST vs AC, 2 trials, 145 participants: SMD =0.02, -0.71, 0.85), apathy (ST vs AC, 2 trials, 81 participants: SMD= 0.14; 0.29, 0.58), depression (ST vs UC, 4 trials, 181 participants; SMD= 0.08; -0.52, 0.69; LT vs UC: 2 trials, 77 participants: SMD =0.01; -0.75, 0.77), anxiety (ST vs UC: 2 trials, 104 participants, SMD= 0.24; -0.85, 1.33) and quality of life (ST vs UC, 2 trials, 127 participants: SMD=-0.05; -0.52, 0.42; ST vs AC: 2 trials, 159 participants, SMD =-0.36, -0.76, 0.05). 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 153
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Targeted clinical application of specific technologies is poised to revolutionize precision care in dementia as these technologies may be used both by patients and caregivers, and at a systems level to provide safe and effective care. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 1,337
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Main results We identified no studies which met the inclusion criteria. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Although behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) is classically defined by behavioral and socio-emotional changes, impairments often extend to other cognitive functions. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 181
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Although the performance of the different methods still has room for improvement, the results are promising and this methodology has a great potential as a support tool for clinicians and healthcare professionals. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
There was some evidence that the use of smartphones and tablets could aid cognitive function in older adults without cognitive impairment, particularly executive function and processing speed. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 28
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The insular cortex is proposed to function as a central brain hub characterized by wide-spread connections and diverse functional roles. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 2,261
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We conducted a systematic review of research in artificial intelligence (AI) for retinal fundus photographic images. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
This comprehensive portrait of rural-urban differences in dementia care highlights possible geographically based inequities and can be used by researchers and decision makers to guide development of more equitable dementia care policies. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Forty-eight studies from 18,456 screened abstracts (Dementia: n = 2,516, Control: n = 1,224) met inclusion criteria for the systematic review. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 2,516
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In the prospective GLORIA-AF registry of AF patients, the presence of clinical complexity was associated with lower odds of being prescribed with OAC (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44–0.57), higher OAC discontinuation, and with a higher risk of adverse events (hazard ratio [HR] 1.63, 95% CI 1.43–1.86).[ 4 ] Indeed, “high clinical complexity” patients defined using latent class analysis constituted 6.6% of AF patients, and was associated with higher hazards of experiencing the primary composite outcome of all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 1.47, 95% 1.24–1.75).[ 5 ] Comorbidities and polypharmacy have an important influence on decision-making, by conditioning either lack of prescription of OAC in patients at risk or inappropriate dosing.[ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] Recognizing that AF management is more than simply OAC alone, and requires a holistic and integrated care approach, contemporary guidelines globally on AF management have promoted this concept, based on the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway, emphasizing Anticoagulation, Better symptom management with rate or rhythm control, and Comorbidity/lifestyle management.[ 9 ] [ 10 ] [ 11 ] The ABC pathway is well supported by clinical trial and real-world evidence,[ 11 ] whereby adherence to the ABC pathway is associated with a reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and bleeding.[ 12 ] [ 13 ] Despite this, adherence to ABC-based management remains low, whereby a meta-analysis of 14 studies revealed that only 21% (95% CI 13–34%) of AF patients were managed in accordance with the ABC pathway.[ 12 ] This perhaps highlights a critical gap in the implementation of comprehensive evidence-based care strategies. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Early diagnosis of cognitive disorders in older adults is a major healthcare priority with benefits to patients, families, and health systems. 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Strikingly gene-expression, network-based analysis and cell type deconvolution approaches revealed a consistent immune signature in the brain and blood of female AD patients that was absent in males. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Supervised intervention delivery is linked to greatest benefits. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Despite improvements in diagnostic criteria for dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), the ability to discriminate DLB from Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias remains suboptimal. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 43
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.