The global mortality of ADRD among adults aged ≥65 years increased by 115%, from 6.5 (95% UI 1.5-18) per 100,000 population in 1991 to 14 (95% UI 3.5-37) per 100,000 population in 2021, with an Average Annual Percentage Change (AAPC) of 1.10% (95%CI 0.45%-1.76%). 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2025-09-04
Among 13,875 individuals with nonmissing VRF and outcome data with up to 30 years of follow-up (25% Black, 54% female), 179 developed PD at a mean age of 73.4 years, 94 developed PDD at a mean age of 79.2 years, and 1,791 developed dementia without PD at a mean age of 79.7 years. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 13,875
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Mean age ± SD was 83.4 ± 9.1 years. Most were female (72.0%), white (92.3%), non-Hispanic (84.6%), and lived in nursing homes (76.9%). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 147
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A multidimensional social exposome (MSE)-the combined lifespan measures of education, food insecurity, financial status, access to healthcare, childhood experiences, and more-may shape dementia risk and brain health over the lifespan, particularly in underserved regions like Latin America. 1 key finding →
Participants: 2,211
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The majority of the assessed health care data did not show significant differences between urban and rural SHA inhabitants. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 133
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Per 1-m/s increase in ePWV was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 1.51(1.30-1.75) for dementia and 1.58(1.33-1.89) for Alzheimer's disease (AD), and with an MMSE score decline (adjusted β-coefficient = -0.36; 95% CI = -0.52 to -0.21). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,857
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2025-09-04
The ARIC study enrolled 15,792 participants (27% Black) aged 45-64 years. 5 key findings →
Participants: 15,792
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2025-12-29
Of the 2,183 participants (mean ± SD age 79 ± 4.5 years, 58% female, 24% Black), 176 (8%) developed dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,183
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
59/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.
·
EClinicalMedicine
·
2025-04-01
Less EQ and YoE were associated with brain alterations across groups. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 7,533
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
During the 4-year follow-up, 134 individuals were diagnosed with dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,220
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
57/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 57 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2025-02-20
Among 143 331 older adults with dementia (83 536 [58.3%] female; mean [SD] age, 83.8 [7.5] years), 1312 (0.9%) received a feeding tube in hospital and 142 019 (99.1%) did not. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The rising age of the global population has made Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) a critical public health problem, with significant health-related disparities observed between rural and urban areas. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
This study presents findings from IDEA Café, for older adults aged 50 and older living with early dementia, dementia, Alzheimer’s Disease or cognitive impairment (ED/CI) with no informal caregiver or care partner. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 15
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A total of 1869 participants contributed 5309 observations (mean age 82.9 years, 21.0% Black, 9.3% met research-based dementia criteria). 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,869
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
. Longitudinally, older age (OR=1.14 [1.06-1.22], p<.001), higher levels of p-tau217 (OR=10.37 [3.00-35.02], p<.001) and higher neuropsychiatric symptoms (OR=1.19 [1.02-1.39], p=.023) were associated with higher odds of progression to dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 104
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Of 9,361 SPRINT participants (mean age 67.1 ± 9.5 years, 36.7% female, 58.7% non-Hispanic White), 710 and 1,289 were new users of an ARB or ACEI. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Individuals with dementia and their care partners often report dissatisfaction with the disclosure process due to insufficient information and support. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
There was a significantly higher risk of developing a dementia diagnosis in Hispanic/Latino and NHB participants than NHW participants and comparably increased dementia hazard ratios in the Hispanic/Latino, NHB, and NHW APOE4 carriers than non-carriers (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval {CI}] 1.54 [1.25-1.91], 1.25 [1.00-1.57], and 1.55 [1.40-1.72]). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 9,784
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
54/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 54 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2025-03-06
Of 8976 decedents (mean [SD] age, 81.3 [8.6] years; 4927 women [55.1%] women) in the cohort, 2197 (22.5%) were included in the low wealth category, 4534 (50.5%) in the medium wealth category, and 2245 (27.1%) in the high wealth category. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
This diverse sample of Indigenous (1.65%), Black (11.43%), Hispanic (9.85%), and White (77.07%) older adults had a mean age of 61 (SD = 9.66) and was 52% female. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 27,327
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Minoritized individuals had lower scores and/or greater likelihood of impairment on measures of lexical retrieval, processing speed, cognitive flexibility, and working memory but not global cognition, verbal recall, attention, and category fluency. 5 key findings →
Participants: 56
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Limited studies focusing on the intersectional determinants of preferences of ethnic minority groups or post-migrants with dementia were found. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The cultural tailoring of interventions is promising to address disparities in dementia care and interventions in underserved communities. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A total of 400 103 AF and dementia-related deaths were recorded between 2000 and 2020. 5 key findings →
Participants: 400
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
53/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 53 out of 100.
·
Pregnancy
·
2025-04-24
Midlife individuals who experienced HDP had lower regional CBF and reduced white matter microstructural integrity, compared with those with no adverse pregnancy outcomes. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 81
Evidence: moderate
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 28,180 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.