81/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100.
·
Gastroenterology
·
2019-05-29
In a large placebo-controlled randomized trial, we found that pantoprazole is not associated with any adverse event when used for 3 years, with the possible exception of an increased risk of enteric infections. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 8,791
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The task force issued five statements related to the management of anxiety, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption in adults admitted to the ICU. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 24
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We aimed to determine the effect of live attenuated herpes zoster vaccination on incident dementia diagnoses among people aged 70 years and older using a natural experiment in Ontario, Canada, and to triangulate these findings, using a second natural experiment in Ontario and a quasi-experimental approach that uses data from multiple Canadian provinces. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort
Participants: 232,124
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
Diabetes care
·
2009-02-01
A statistically significant age-adjusted association was observed between the A1C level and the score on all four cognitive tests. 3 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
A total of 19 reviews containing 37 meta-analyses were included umbrella review. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 19
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
·
2024-07-01
Participants receiving CDCM showed significantly fewer behavioral and psychological symptoms (adjusted mean difference [AMD] in NPI score, -10.26 [95% CI, -16.95 to -3.58]; P = .003; Cohen d, -0.78 [95% CI, -1.09 to -0.46]), better mental health (AMD in SF-12 Mental Component Summary score, 2.26 [95% CI, 0.31-4.21]; P = .02; Cohen d, 0.26 [95% CI, -0.11 to 0.51]), and lower caregiver burden (AMD in BIZA-D score, -0.59 [95% CI, -0.81 to -0.37]; P Conclusions and relevance In this secondary analysis of a cluster randomized clinical trial, CDCM was associated with improved patient, caregiver, and health system-relevant outcomes over 36 months beyond the intervention period. 3 key findings →
Design: RCT
Participants: 428
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Main results We included 82 studies with 10,613 participants; 72 studies with 9783 participants provided extractable data. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 10,613
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.
·
Neurology
·
2025-03-10
We analyzed 1,240 MRIs from 473 patients (age: 69.2 ± 7.4 [range: 49-87]; 32.8% women). 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,240
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The of establishing the diagnosis of pneumonia and cause is with the antibiotic studies for of community-acquired studies for of community-acquired The diagnosis of is based on a of clinical and laboratory The diagnosis of is and and as well as disease, congestive heart failure, with pneumonia and cases of and are of do not require and are the of antibiotic antimicrobial is usually for and a chest radiography is usually to establish the diagnosis of examination to or is for detecting pneumonia Chest radiography is considered is for the etiologic the and or conditions. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cognitive impairment are 2 of the most common chronic conditions found in persons aged > or = 60 years. 1 key finding →
Participants: 2,977
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Treatment of dementia with cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine can result in statistically significant but clinically marginal improvement in measures of cognition and global assessment of dementia. 1 key finding →
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Among 12,327 patients who underwent randomization (6162 to the asundexian group and 6165 to the placebo group), the incidence of ischemic stroke was lower in the asundexian group than in the placebo group (6.2% vs. 8.4%; cause-specific hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.84; P<0.001). 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 12,327
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
67/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2012-09-01
Five databases were searched for English-language studies up to August 2010, and included all study designs with a comparative group. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
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.
·
Diabetes Care
·
2025-09-19
After a median follow-up time of 14.3 (7.9-20.0) years, dementia was recorded in 530 (1.2%) individuals with type 1 diabetes and 1,867 (0.9%) age-, sex-, and county-matched control individuals (mean baseline age 33.0 [14.0] years). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 43,440
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Twelve months' treatment with doxycycline or rifampin, alone or in combination, has no beneficial effects on cognition or function in AD. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 305
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
64/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100.
·
BMJ
·
2021-03-29
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Scoping reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, follow a systematic approach to map evidence on a topic and identify main concepts, theories, sources, and knowledge gaps.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
61/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 61 out of 100.
·
Diabetologia
·
2005-11-08
Compared to people without diabetes, people with diabetes have a greater rate of decline in cognitive function and a greater risk of cognitive decline. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences in demographic characteristics and in outcome variables (HHI, GSES, and SF-12v2 mental component score and physical component score) between users and nonusers. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 101
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
23% of the total global burden of disease is attributable to disorders in people aged 60 years and older. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
There are limited data regarding cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma biomarkers among patients with Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy (CAA). 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
60/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 60 out of 100.
·
BMJ Open
·
2025-04-01
We identified 30 studies reporting health outcomes following hip fracture. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
59/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2014-04-01
Although levodopa is the most effective medication available for treating the motor symptoms of Parkinson disease, in certain instances (eg, mild symptoms, tremor as the only or most prominent symptom, aged Conclusions and relevance Strong evidence supports using levodopa and dopamine agonists for motor symptoms at all stages of Parkinson disease. 1 key finding →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
The role of atrial fibrillation in cognitive impairment and dementia, independent of stroke, is uncertain. 4 key findings →
Design: post-hoc analysis
Participants: 31,506
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
58/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 58 out of 100.
·
BMC geriatrics
·
2017-08-14
Data collection began in Ontario and Alberta Canada in June 2015 and is expected to be completed in June 2017. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
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.