83/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 83 out of 100.
·
JAMA Neurology
·
2025-05-01
ARIA is an adverse event associated with donanemab treatment that requires safety monitoring. 4 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial
Participants: 3,030
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
83/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 83 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2022-01-01
Of 3285 included participants, the mean (SD) age was 70.4 (7.45) years; 1706 participants (52%) were female, 2661 (81%) had mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer disease, and 1777 (54%) used symptomatic medications for Alzheimer disease. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 1,087
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
After a median of 4.7 years of follow-up, the rate of cardiovascular disease was 10.7 events per 1000 person-years in the aspirin group and 11.3 events per 1000 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.08). 4 key findings →
Participants: 19,114
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among persons with early Alzheimer's disease, the use of gantenerumab led to a lower amyloid plaque burden than placebo at 116 weeks but was not associated with slower clinical decline. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 980
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
80/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 80 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2013-10-01
During the CEE plus MPA intervention phase, the numbers of CHD cases were 196 for CEE plus MPA vs 159 for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 1.18; 95% CI, 0.95-1.45) and 206 vs 155, respectively, for invasive breast cancer (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.53). 3 key findings →
Participants: 8,506
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In patients with early Alzheimer's disease, donanemab resulted in a better composite score for cognition and for the ability to perform activities of daily living than placebo at 76 weeks, although results for secondary outcomes were mixed. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 257
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Concentrations of amyloid-beta (Aβ)(42) in the CSF appeared to decline 25 years before expected symptom onset. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 128
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
77/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 77 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2025-01-01
These results show that in addition to APOE ε4 allele count, severity of Aβ neuropathology and comorbid cerebrovascular pathology may be relevant for clinicians prescribing anti-Aβ monoclonal antibodies for early AD and developing individualized safety monitoring plans. 2 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 985
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We found a sequence to pathological changes, with rates of Aβ deposition in mutation carriers being significantly different from those in non-carriers first (across regions that showed a significant difference, at a mean of 18·9 years [SD 3·3] before expected onset), followed by hypometabolism (14·1 years [5·1] before expected onset), and lastly structural decline (4·7 years [4·2] before expected onset). 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 346
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Gradual up-titration of dose significantly reduced ARIA-E risk while demonstrating comparable pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics compared to standard dosing. 5 key findings →
Design: phase-3-trial
Participants: 843
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
76/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 76 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2019-04-01
Among 16 008 registered participants, 11 409 (71.3%) completed study procedures and were included in the analysis (median age, 75 years [interquartile range, 71-80]; 50.9% women; 60.5% with MCI). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 16
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
76/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 76 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2013-02-01
Our random 20% sample included 848,303 fee-for-service Medicare decedents (mean age, 82.3 years; 57.9% female, 88.1% white). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 270,202
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
75/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 75 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2025-08-01
Among older adults at risk of cognitive decline and dementia, a structured, higher-intensity intervention had a statistically significant greater benefit on global cognition compared with an unstructured, self-guided intervention. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,056
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Frontotemporal lobar degeneration with neuronal inclusions of the TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (FTLD-TDP) is a fatal neurodegenerative disorder with only a limited number of risk loci identified. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 985
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
AUC for amyloid and tau PET provide expert recommendations for clinical use of these technologies in the evolving landscape of diagnostics and therapeutics for Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic-review
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
Nature medicine
·
2019-01-21
Neurofilament light chain (NfL) is a promising fluid biomarker of disease progression for various cerebral proteopathies. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 187
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2022-10-03
Data from 17 107 individuals (321 Asian, 635 Black, 829 Hispanic, and 15 322 White) with MCI or dementia and amyloid PET were analyzed between April 2020 and January 2022. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 3,154
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2023-08-01
Among 1736 randomized participants (mean age, 73.0 years; 996 [57.4%] women; 1182 [68.1%] with low/medium tau pathology and 552 [31.8%] with high tau pathology), 1320 (76%) completed the trial. 3 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 860
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2004-08-01
Although significant treatment effects were not seen in the primary efficacy measures, outcomes on secondary measures suggest promising directions for further evaluation of donepezil treatment in patients with MCI. 2 key findings →
Participants: 133
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
74/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2015-11-01
Avagacestat did not demonstrate efficacy and was associated with adverse dose-limiting effects. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 263
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
73/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 73 out of 100.
·
Nature Medicine
·
2026-03-05
Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 2 (TREM2) regulates microglial function and is implicated in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis. 2 key findings →
Design: phase-2-trial
Participants: 381
Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
These results support the safety and efficacy of memantine for the treatment of mild to moderate AD. 5 key findings →
Participants: 201
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2026-02-10
Of the 120 participants (mean age, 71.4 [SD, 8.6] years; 55% were female), 93 (77.5%) completed the trial. 1 key finding →
Design: phase-2-trial
Participants: 120
Evidence: null result
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Cognitive training involving speed of cognitive processing has the potential to delay the diagnosis of ADRD. 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 2,021
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 neurology
·
2022-12-01
The mean (SD) age of the study population sample (N = 3496) was 76.4 (7.6) years, and 2095 participants (60%) were female. 5 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 3,496
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 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.