A biomarker panel was identified that included markers significantly increased (cortisol, pancreatic polypeptide, insulinlike growth factor binding protein 2, β(2) microglobulin, vascular cell adhesion molecule 1, carcinoembryonic antigen, matrix metalloprotein 2, CD40, macrophage inflammatory protein 1α, superoxide dismutase, and homocysteine) and decreased (apolipoprotein E, epidermal growth factor receptor, hemoglobin, calcium, zinc, interleukin 17, and albumin) in AD. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 207
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Atorvastatin treatment may be of some clinical benefit and could be established as an effective therapy for Alzheimer disease if the current findings are substantiated by a much larger multicenter trial. 3 key findings →
Participants: 98
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Cognitive decline over 36 months of continuous galantamine treatment was substantially less than the predicted cognitive decline of untreated patients with mild to moderate dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: open-label trial
Participants: 119
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Medial temporal lobe atrophy seems to be a more important predictor of cognition than small-vessel disease in MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 896
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Among well-functioning older adults, DM and poor glucose control among those with DM are associated with worse cognitive function and greater decline. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 717
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The development of MCI is associated with measurements of cognition and depression, racial and constitutional factors, and cerebrovascular disease. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 927
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Follow-up case-control association study. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 1,829
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Comprehensive and unbiased meta-analysis of all published and unpublished data from case-control studies for the SORL1 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that had been repeatedly assessed across studies. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 12,464
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Diabetes mellitus did not increase the risk of incident AD in the Framingham cohort overall; however, DM may be a risk factor for AD in the absence of other known major AD risk factors. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,210
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Donepezil is an effective and safe drug for the long-term symptomatic treatment of mild to moderately severe AD for up to 144 weeks (2.8 years), and sustained treatment may confer some advantages. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 763
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
When proper normative values are used, only age and education, and not race or ethnicity, are associated with higher frequency of MCI. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
This study is an extension of a 28-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of memantine in 252 patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease. 1 key finding →
Design: open-label trial
Participants: 175
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
In this population-based case-control study, any frequency of moderate exercise performed in midlife or late life was associated with a reduced odds of having MCI. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,324
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Serum tHcy levels were significantly higher and serum folate and vitamin B12 levels were lower in patients with DAT and patients with histologically confirmed AD than in controls. 4 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 164
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
The findings highlight the regional specificity of the association of WMHs with AD. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 717
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Encoding-task fMRI was successfully implemented in a single-site, 24-week, AD randomized controlled trial. 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 24
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Regular physical activity could represent an important and potent protective factor for cognitive decline and dementia in elderly persons. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Dementia due to Alzheimer disease is preceded by about 5 to 6 years of accelerated decline in multiple cognitive functions. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,071
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
These findings add to the growing literature to suggest that the degree of functional impairment at baseline is an important predictor of conversion to dementia and may help explain differences in findings between epidemiological and clinic-based studies. 4 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 28
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The Rotterdam Study previously found that higher dietary intakes of vitamins E and C related to lower risk of dementia and Alzheimer disease (AD) over 6 years of follow-up. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 5,395
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Diabetes mellitus may be associated with an increased risk of developing AD and may affect cognitive systems differentially. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 151
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Of the 204 patients enrolled in the study, re-review after as many as 5 years of follow-up resulted in a final clinical classification of 188 with probable AD. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 204
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Very mild bvFTD targets a specific subset of frontal and insular regions. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 15
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We conclude that patients with mild cognitive impairment and depression are at more than twice the risk of developing dementia of Alzheimer type as those without depression. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 114
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
White matter lesions, especially in the periventricular region, increase the risk of dementia in elderly people. 2 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,077
Evidence: moderate
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 27,780 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.