Of 1,164 participants (mean age 73.5 years, 64% women), 580 (49.8%) had mild hearing impairment and 196 (16.8%) had moderate/severe hearing impairment. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,164
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The combinations of hearing and proprioceptive impairment and hearing, vision, and proprioceptive impairment, were positively correlated with cDVR (β = 0.087 and p = 0.036, β = 0.110 and p = 0.018, respectively). 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 174
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
PloS one
·
2023-02-01
Alzheimer's disease and related dementias is a major public health burden-compounding over upcoming years due to longevity. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 30,097
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We identified 1,041 incident all-cause dementia cases in 4,283 participants over 37,102 person-years of follow-up. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 4,283
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Among 5,699 participants (mean age: 70±8 years), we observed total PM2.5 concentrations ranging from 16 to 206 μg/m3. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 5,699
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Evidence on the association between air pollution and dementia is accumulating but still inconclusive, and the potential effect modification by genetics is unclear. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 227,840
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
If the associations we observed are causal, then air pollution from traffic might be an important risk factor for vascular dementia and Alzheimer's disease. 3 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 1,806
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The potential determinants of cognitive decline identified in this study, in particular modifiable risk factors, should be tested in the context of randomised controlled trials. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 626
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
Maturitas
·
2021-06-04
Screening for IC impairments identifies older adults at higher risk of incident frailty and incident IADL/ADL disability. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 759
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Several studies with animal research associate air pollution in Alzheimer's disease (AD) neuropathology, but the actual impact of air pollution on the risk of AD is unknown. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 95,690
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
In this cohort study, higher residential PM2.5 levels, especially from agriculture and wildfires, were associated with higher rates of incident dementia, providing further evidence supporting PM2.5 reduction as a population-based approach to promote healthy cognitive aging. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 27
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We found no evidence that exposure to road traffic noise, either independently or in combination with traffic air pollution, was associated with risk of dementia in our study area. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,721
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Midlife insomnia (fully adjusted hazard ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval = 1.02-1.50) and late-life terminal insomnia (fully adjusted odds ratio = 1.94, 95% confidence interval = 1.08-3.49) were associated with a higher dementia risk. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,446
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Their results on motor testing from the preceding years were plotted, and then assessed with regression analysis, to determine when markers first deviated from normal values. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 78
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
·
2019-04-01
From a total of 146 patients, 111 patients were included (67 men [60.4%]; mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 62.5 [11.5] years). 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 146
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A total of 3,056 participants without diabetes treatment and 480 with diabetes treatment were included (mean age at baseline, 75.1 years; mean 7.5 years of follow-up). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 3,056
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Huntington's disease patients had a lower prevalence of hypertension compared with age-matched gene-negative controls. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 14,534
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Trajectories of systolic BP were separated markedly around 25 to 45 years of age, with the group below the median of cognition score having higher levels of systolic BP than the group above the median. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 912
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
This study replicated research showing that education was positively associated with cognition at baseline. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 28,417
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
Neuropsychology
·
2016-02
In the full cohort, 9.4% were diagnosed with major depression and 8.6% had chronically elevated depressive symptoms, both of which were related to adverse cognitive outcomes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,965
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
We report 1,136 cases of incident dementia among 4,166 individuals with nonmissing APOE status. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 4,166
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
Stroke
·
2025-05-12
At study entry, the mean (SD) age of the participants was 70 (SD, 8.9) years and 41% were males. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 555
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
In the first year of follow-up, increased exposure to all air pollutants was associated with an increase in the use of CMHTs in a dose-response manner. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 5,024
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
This study included 5646 participants (mean age 76 years, 65% female). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 5,646
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Of 6 952 440 vaccinated patients in the derivation cohort, 5 150 310 (74.1%) had two vaccine doses. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
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 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.