69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2022-04-20
The findings of the current study show that the longitudinal, cumulative trajectory of cardiovascular risk is predictive of dementia risk and associated with the emergence of memory decline. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 1,244
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2022-10-03
One-hundred and twenty participants, with a mean (range) of 1.2 (1-4) strokes, a mean (SD) of 66.5 (53.8) months since the most recent stroke, mean (SD) baseline age of 70 (8) years, mean (SD) baseline ADAS-Cog-Plus of 0.22 (0.81), and 74 (62%) male participants, were randomized to EX (34 participants), ENRICH (34 participants), or BAT (52 participants). 3 key findings →
Participants: 34
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
JAMA network open
·
2022-06-01
The cohort sample included 5058 beneficiaries with dementia (mean [SD] age, 85.5 [8.0] years; 3038 women [60.1%]; 809 [16.0%] non-Hispanic Black, 357 [7.1%] Hispanic, and 3892 non-Hispanic White respondents [76.9%]). 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 5,058
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
EClinicalMedicine
·
2022-09-23
Our prediction model was internally evaluated based on five-fold cross-validation on discrimination and calibration, and it was further compared with existing prediction scales. 2 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 2,416
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2022-08-29
The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for clinical trials of anti-Aβ immunotherapy published on or before January 12, 2022. 4 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 9,429
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
69/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 69 out of 100.
·
JAMA Network Open
·
2022-11-18
There were 21 603 to 51 236 patients per year (total for 2010-2020, 381 488 patients) in the OAC-eligible incident AF cohort (mean [SD] age, 77.2 [6.1] to 77.4 [6.8] years; 13 871 [51.8%] to 22 901 [49.8%] women). 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 236
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
In this cohort of French older adults, higher adherence to the French MIND diet was associated with a lower dementia risk and with preserved white matter microstructure. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Participants: 1,412
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
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
On meta-analysis, PARO had no ST or LT compared to UC or AC over 5-12 weeks on agitation (ST vs UC, 4 trials, 153 participants: pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.25; - 0.57 to 0.06; LT vs UC; 2 trials, 77 participants, SMD = -0.24; - 0.94, 0.46), cognition (ST vs UC, 3 trials, 128 participants: SMD= 0.03; -0.32, 0.38), overall neuropsychiatric symptoms (ST vs UC, 3 trials, 169 participants: SMD= -0.01; -0.32, 0.29; ST vs AC, 2 trials, 145 participants: SMD =0.02, -0.71, 0.85), apathy (ST vs AC, 2 trials, 81 participants: SMD= 0.14; 0.29, 0.58), depression (ST vs UC, 4 trials, 181 participants; SMD= 0.08; -0.52, 0.69; LT vs UC: 2 trials, 77 participants: SMD =0.01; -0.75, 0.77), anxiety (ST vs UC: 2 trials, 104 participants, SMD= 0.24; -0.85, 1.33) and quality of life (ST vs UC, 2 trials, 127 participants: SMD=-0.05; -0.52, 0.42; ST vs AC: 2 trials, 159 participants, SMD =-0.36, -0.76, 0.05). 1 key finding →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 153
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Analysis was performed on 115 participants as the full analysis set (probiotic 55, placebo 60). 4 key findings →
Participants: 130
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2022-08-26
The risk of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia in individuals with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) and biomarkers indicating Alzheimer disease (AD) pathology in comparison with individuals with SCD without biomarker evidence for AD is critical to delineate the potential role of biomarker assessment in this group. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Atypical and typical AD patients were comparable for Aβ42/40 values. 4 key findings →
Design: retrospective cohort
Participants: 39
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
68/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 68 out of 100.
·
BMC geriatrics
·
2022-12-27
Not only dementia diagnosis but also time spent with the diagnosis was crucial for the use of LTC in the month preceding death, in particular residential care. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 6,294
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
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
Cox regression and accelerated failure time models were used to investigate whether sex, apolipoprotein E genotype and e4 carriage were associated with amyloid onset age in all cohorts. 5 key findings →
Design: longitudinal study
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
We tested the trained model using five other studies, three of which used PET as a biomarker of significant amyloid β burden (testing the deep learning model between amyloid β positive vs amyloid β negative). 2 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 648
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Accumulating data suggest that cerebrovascular disease contributes to Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology and progression toward dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 1,722
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
·
2022-03-01
In this exploratory analysis of a US community-based cohort, several echocardiographic measures of lower LA function were significantly associated with an increased risk of subsequent dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 4,096
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 network open
·
2022-09-01
Individual conditions have been identified as risk factors for dementia; however, it is important to consider the role of multimorbidity, as conditions often co-occur. 4 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 960
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
·
2022-05-26
Whether this results in an increased risk for dementia remains unclear. 4 key findings →
Design: prospective cohort
Participants: 3,975
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.
·
BMJ
·
2022-02-09
Among individuals who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2, 32% (27 698 of 87 337) sought medical attention in the post-acute period for one or more new or persistent clinical sequelae, which was 11% higher than the 2020 comparison group. 5 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 87
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
The chronological progression of brain atrophy over decades, from pre-symptomatic to dementia stages, has never been formally depicted in Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Design: cross-sectional
Participants: 3,512
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Overall, 68 studies were included in the meta-analyses. 2 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
In AD a clinical recommendation can be made for NEURO-AD TM system and for high-frequency rTMS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) as probably effective protocols (B-level of evidence) and for anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC as a possibly effective. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Our findings suggest that VR training is an effective treatment for both people with MCI and dementia. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
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.