85/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 85 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2019-02-28
Risk for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD), the most prevalent dementia, is partially driven by genetics. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 94,437
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
84/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 84 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2015-05-01
Among persons without dementia, the prevalence of cerebral amyloid pathology as determined by positron emission tomography or cerebrospinal fluid findings was associated with age, APOE genotype, and presence of cognitive impairment. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 2,914
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
82/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2017-07-17
We identified rare coding variants associated with Alzheimer's disease in a three-stage case-control study of 85,133 subjects. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 85,133
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
APOE ɛ4, the most significant genetic risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD), may mask effects of other loci. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 4,203
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Amyloid-beta 42 (Aβ42) and phosphorylated tau (pTau) levels in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) reflect core features of the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) more directly than clinical diagnosis. 2 key findings →
Participants: 8,074
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
Nature Medicine
·
2025-04-03
African heritage diets are increasingly being replaced by Western-style dietary patterns because of urbanization, economic development, increased access to processed foods, globalization and changing social norms. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
71/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2020-05-01
After controlling for the baseline AES-C score, site, and comedication with donepezil or galantamine, the mean change in the AES-C score between the bupropion and placebo groups was not statistically significant (mean change, 2.22; 95% CI, -0.47 to 4.91; P = .11). 4 key findings →
Participants: 108
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2022-03-01
This study found that CSF-based estimates using adjusted data-driven cutoffs were up to 10% higher than PET-based estimates in people without dementia, whereas the results were similar among people with dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 97
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
70/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 70 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2016-04-01
The patients receiving regular PPI medication (n = 2950; mean [SD] age, 83.8 [5.4] years; 77.9% female) had a significantly increased risk of incident dementia compared with the patients not receiving PPI medication (n = 70,729; mean [SD] age, 83.0 [5.6] years; 73.6% female) (hazard ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.36-1.52]; P Conclusions and relevance The avoidance of PPI medication may prevent the development of dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,950
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
Nature genetics
·
2022-11-21
Alzheimer's disease (AD), the leading cause of dementia, has an estimated heritability of approximately 70% 1 . 3 key findings →
Participants: 32,558
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Alzheimer's disease and coronary artery disease are common late-life chronic conditions and share multiple risk factors, including the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele. 4 key findings →
Design: RCT
Participants: 1,177
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2022-07-01
In this genetic association study, a novel variant associated with AD was identified: R251G always coinherited with ε4 on the APOE gene, which mitigates the ε4-associated AD risk. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 37
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The prediction of dementia in AD by SMI with subsequent amnestic MCI supports the model of a consecutive 3-stage clinical manifestation of AD from SMI via MCI to dementia. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,415
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
A rare coding variant (rs72824905, p.P522R) conferring protection against Alzheimer's disease (AD) was identified in the gene encoding the enzyme phospholipase-C-γ2 (PLCG2) that is highly expressed in microglia. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 10,097
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2023-10-11
This study included patients with clinical SCD and SCD-free, healthy control (HC) participants with available baseline CSF and/or longitudinal cognitive data from the observational DZNE Longitudinal Cognitive Impairment and Dementia study. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 672
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
PloS one
·
2015-12-14
This is relevant as the number of old people (a) living alone and (b) suffering from dementia is expected to increase rapidly in the next decades. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 201
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
SMI and EMCI with self-reported concerns were associated with the same risk of AD dementia, suggesting that pre-LMCI risk conditions should be extended to SMI with concerns. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,892
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
Nature Genetics
·
2013-10-27
Researchers conducted a large, two-stage meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in individuals of European ancestry.
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
Nature Genetics
·
2009-09-06
This study undertook a two-stage genome-wide association study (GWAS) of Alzheimer's disease involving over 16,000 individuals. 4 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
66/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 66 out of 100.
·
Nature Genetics
·
2011-04-03
The authors sought to identify new susceptibility loci for Alzheimer's disease through a staged association study and by testing suggestive loci reported by the Alzheimer's Disease Genetic Consortium in a companion paper. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is proposed as an indicator of transitional disease stage 2 in the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 457
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
65/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.
·
Ophthalmology
·
2018-04-30
A total of 16 084 European adults from 8 cohort studies (mean age range, 56.9±12.3-82.1±4.2 years) of the European Eye Epidemiology (E3) consortium. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 16
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
65/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 65 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2014-09-03
Meta-analysis of the 2 family-based and the 5 case-control cohorts yielded a p value of 0.0029, while the overall summary estimate (using case-control data only) resulted in an odds ratio of 1.67 (95% confidence interval 0.95-2.92) for the association between the TREM2 R47H and increased AD risk. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Higher levels of P-tau181 (HR = 1.32 [95% CI: 1.17-1.51]), NfL (HR = 1.19 [95% CI: 1.03-1.36]), and GFAP (HR = 1.36 [95% CI: 1.22-1.52]), and a lower Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio (HR = 0.80 [95% CI: 0.68-0.95]) were associated with an increased risk of progressing to clinically-diagnosed DAT. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,007
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Although the prevalence of dementia continues to increase worldwide, incidence in the western world might have decreased as a result of better vascular care and improved brain health. 2 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
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.