60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2026-04-16
A total of 42 342 participants from the pooled cohorts were included (mean [SD] age, 61.3 [9.8] years; 55.0% female). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 342
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The rate of cognitive change in elderly persons with and without diabetes mellitus is similar, although cognitive performance is poorer in persons with diabetes mellitus. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,493
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Cognitive changes in normal individuals who will subsequently decline may be observed at least 6.5 years prior to symptom onset. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 208
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
After cohort matching, 48% of participants were women (n = 74 464), 61% were white (n = 93 442), and 31% (n = 48 056) were Medicare Advantage insured, with a mean (SD) age of 64 (10) years. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 154
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.
·
JAMA Health Forum
·
2026-08-21
The analytic sample included 1 054 926 beneficiaries, including 219 942 (mean [SD] age, 75.3 [6.3] years; 54.6% female) who developed new complex conditions in 2019 and 834 984 (mean [SD] age, 73.8 [5.6] years; 56.7% female) who did not develop a new complex condition in 2019. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
In addition to outperforming existing plasma biomarkers, the dSST predicted mid-life dementia risk over a 20-year follow-up across two independent cohorts with different ethnic backgrounds (areas under the curve [AUCs]: dSST 0.68-0.70, dSST+age 0.75-0.81). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 11,277
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
NPS were highly prevalent (≥90%) in early and late bvFTD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 354
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.
·
Stroke
·
2025-03-10
We identified 1143 dementia-free individuals with acute stroke during follow-up: 1061 (92.8%) ischemic, 82 (7.2%) hemorrhagic, 49.9% female, and 30.8% Black. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2016-06-01
These results suggest that, to optimize observing a treatment effect, clinical trials enrolling cognitively normal individuals should selectively recruit participants with abnormal levels of both amyloid and tau (ie, stage 2) because this group would be expected to show the greatest cognitive decline over time if untreated. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We examined longitudinal associations between the apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (ApoE4(+) status) and several cognitive outcomes and tested effect modification by sex. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 113
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
Neuropsychology
·
2007-03-01
The authors used mixed-effects growth models to examine longitudinal change in neuropsychological performance over a 4-year period among 197 individuals who were either normal or had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) at baseline. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 33
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
BMC Geriatrics
·
2017-10-25
Of the 18,341 patients, we found that 2202 (12%) were described as "frail" in clinical notes. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 18,341
Evidence: moderate
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
Our findings suggest that APOE epsilon4-mediated risk for Alzheimer disease is associated with widespread decline in rCBF over time that precedes the onset of dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In older adults, variable agreement between in vivo imaging and CERAD NP score was observed. 3 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Progression of Alzheimer dementia (AD) is highly variable. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
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.
·
BMC geriatrics
·
2013-12-19
This study compared individuals whose clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) matched or did not match neuropathologic results at autopsy on clinical and functional outcomes (cognitive impairment, functional status and neuropsychiatric symptoms). 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
& objective Evidence is limited on how estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) relate to dementia at different ages. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 9,967
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Despite using more home health and hospital services than controls in the baseline preenrollment period, which suggests that they were sicker, participants receiving house calls had 17% lower overall Medicare costs than controls, and there was no indication of poorer quality of care, greater mortality, or underservice. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 9,425
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
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
In contrast to observations in individuals not treated with CART, we found no relationship between CSF markers and neurological status in this CART-using cohort with advanced HIV/AIDS. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 106
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Even before dementia becomes apparent, cognitive decline may contribute to deterioration in oral health. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 10,050
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
Digital biomarker prognostic models can be a useful tool to assist large-scale population screening for the early detection of cognitive impairment and patient monitoring over time. 1 key finding →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In this analytic cohort of 4130 participants, 486 (11.8%) experienced at least one hospitalization with delirium. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 4,130
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
- Randomized / 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
- Multicenter 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 32,180 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.