Midlife and late-life risk factors contributed to 22.7% and 16.5% of total dementia cases, respectively. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 37,931
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Two regions achieved genome-wide significance with TDP-43: apolipoprotein E (APOE) and TMEM106B. Three loci reached genome-wide significance with HS: APOE, TMEM106B, and granulin precursor (GRN). 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 9,509
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The overall adherence rate to MI was 84.7%. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Donanemab treatment significantly slowed clinical progression at 76w and had a safety profile consistent with earlier studies. 5 key findings →
Participants: 1,182
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
While sex differences were not apparent at asymptomatic stages, females showed more rapid declines across all outcomes in symptomatic stages compared to males. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 337
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Three progression clusters emerged in both cohorts: stable cognition, slow decline, and rapid decline-each including cases initially classified as CN or MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 186
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
One hundred forty-nine carers enrolled in the study. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 149
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The intervention group showed less discomfort (-1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1.88 to -0.23) and fewer sentinel events (-0.40; 95% CI = -0.64 to -0.16), specifically pneumonia (-0.08; 95% CI = -0.14, -0.02). 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 116
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
NULISA plasma biomarkers revealed disease-specific protein patterns. 5 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 194
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Age- and education-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for ADRD increased as neighborhood disadvantage increased, to 1.42 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.91) in the most disadvantaged quintile compared to the least disadvantaged quintile, with a significant linear trend (p = 0.012). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 10,915
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
WMHs in the frontoparietal and anterior periventricular region were associated with blood pressure traits, WMH genetic risk score (GRS), baseline and decline in general cognitive performance, incident all-cause dementia, and ischemic stroke. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 2,878
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Females had higher rates of positive amyloid PET visual reads (63% vs. 59%, P < 0.001) and higher Centiloids (CLs; median 48.7 vs. 36.8, p < 0.001). 5 key findings →
Participants: 10,361
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
At baseline, Aβ+ participants showed higher CP FWf, increased white matter hyperintensity (WMH) volume, and decreased diffusion tensor image analysis along the perivascular space (DTI-ALPS). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 216
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of developing criteria for the symptomatic predementia phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), referred to in this article as mild cognitive impairment due to AD. 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Per 1-m/s increase in ePWV was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 1.51(1.30-1.75) for dementia and 1.58(1.33-1.89) for Alzheimer's disease (AD), and with an MMSE score decline (adjusted β-coefficient = -0.36; 95% CI = -0.52 to -0.21). 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,857
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In multi-adjusted models, higher adherence to the EAT-Lancet diet was associated with higher total mean cortical thickness, and thicker cortex in Alzheimer's disease-signature regions, while a higher adherence to the MeDi was associated with better cognitive performance. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 615
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
There is increasing evidence that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in individuals with unimpaired performance on cognitive tests may represent the first symptomatic manifestation of Alzheimer's disease (AD). 5 key findings →
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Blood-based markers (BBMs) have recently shown promise to revolutionize the diagnostic and prognostic work-up of Alzheimer's disease (AD), as well as to improve the design of interventional trials.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Non-specific codes were most common. Alzheimer's and vascular dementia codes showed high regional variability. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,016
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Two hundred eighty dyads were enrolled. Caregivers during the intervention period reported lower levels of RSS of 0.7 points (standard deviation [SD]: 0.8) compared to the caregivers in the control period. 5 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
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
The telmisartan group had the lowest risk of all dementias (telmisartan vs NT-ARB: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60 to 1.01; telmisartan vs angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor: HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.94). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 39,665
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In 2006, the worldwide prevalence of Alzheimer's disease was 26.6 million. 5 key findings →
Participants: 85
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
During the past decade, a conceptual shift occurred in the field of Alzheimer's disease (AD) considering the disease as a continuum.
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Disclosure (N = 194) and non-disclosure (N = 180) groups did not differ on IGT-AD (mean disclosure-non-disclosure difference [MD] at 6 weeks: -1.5, p = 0.14; 9 months: -1.2, p = 0.35; 15 months: -2.0, p = 0.07), IES-R (MD at 6 weeks: 0.00, p = 0.98; 9 months: 0.01, p = 0.84; 15 months: 0.03, p = 0.64), or change in secondary outcomes. 4 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 194
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 27,780 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.