Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE ε4 carriers. 1 key finding →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 1,090
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
82/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 82 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2014-02-01
Among patients with probable Alzheimer disease and agitation who were receiving psychosocial intervention, the addition of citalopram compared with placebo significantly reduced agitation and caregiver distress; however, cognitive and cardiac adverse effects of citalopram may limit its practical application at the dosage of 30 mg per day. 5 key findings →
Participants: 186
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
81/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100.
·
PLoS medicine
·
2014-11-18
The overall effect size (Hedges' g, random effects model) for CCT versus control was small and statistically significant, g = 0.22 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.29). 4 key findings →
Participants: 4,885
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
81/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 81 out of 100.
·
Age and ageing
·
2014-03-06
We aimed to synthesise data on risk factors for incident delirium and where possible conduct meta-analysis of these. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 411
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Older people with SMC but no objective complaints are twice as likely to develop dementia as individuals without SMC. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 15,009
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Between Dec 8, 2009, and Dec 23, 2011, we randomly allocated 278 patients to treatment: 133 to placebo and 145 to idalopirdine. 132 patients in the placebo group and 140 in the experimental group were included in the final analysis. 5 key findings →
Design: clinical trial
Participants: 278
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2014-01-01
Among patients with mild to moderate AD, 2000 IU/d of alpha tocopherol compared with placebo resulted in slower functional decline. 5 key findings →
Participants: 152
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
79/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 79 out of 100.
·
Age and ageing
·
2014-11-25
A total of 21,788 citations were screened, and seven studies of diverse quality were included in the review, comprising 1,691 participants. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 1,691
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Consortium is a collaborative network of researchers working together on a range of large-scale studies that integrate data from 70 institutions worldwide. 2 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 12,826
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
EQ-5D utility scores averaged 0·03 (95% CI 0·01-0·05; p=0·0002) better with levodopa than with levodopa-sparing therapy; rates of dementia (hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·61-1·08, p=0·14), admissions to institutions (0·86, 0·63-1·18; p=0·4), and death (0·85, 0·69-1·06, p=0·17) were not significantly different, but the upper CIs precluded any substantial increase with levodopa compared with levodopa-sparing therapy. 179 (28%) of 632 patients allocated dopamine agonists and 104 (23%) of 460 patients allocated MAOBI discontinued allocated treatment because of side-effects compared with 11 (2%) of 528 patients allocated levodopa (p<0·0001). 2 key findings →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 1,620
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
The aims of this study were to identify candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and mechanisms of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and to generate SNP to gene to pathway hypotheses. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 370,542
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
78/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 78 out of 100.
·
JAMA
·
2014-03-01
Physicians have a responsibility to recognize caregiver burden. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Full text may need a subscription
Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is a complex disorder characterised by a broad range of clinical manifestations, differential pathological signatures, and genetic variability. 4 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 3,526
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Brain networks or 'connectomes' include a minority of highly connected hub nodes that are functionally valuable, because their topological centrality supports integrative processing and adaptive behaviours. 5 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 56
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
It is believed that glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK-3) hyperphosphorylates tau protein in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). 1 key finding →
Design: randomized controlled trial
Participants: 146
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
75/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 75 out of 100.
·
Neurology
·
2014-06-13
Significant proportions of the observed variance in age at symptom onset in ADAD can be explained by family history and mutation type, providing empirical support for use of these data to estimate onset in clinical research. 2 key findings →
Participants: 3,275
Evidence: low
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
APOE4 confers greater AD risk in women. 5 key findings →
Design: case-control study
Participants: 5,496
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.
·
BMC public health
·
2014-06-24
Higher Hcy levels, lower educational attainment, and decreased physical activity were particularly strong predictors of incident AD. 3 key findings →
Design: systematic review
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
·
2014-07-16
MCR is common in older adults, and is a strong and early risk factor for cognitive decline. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 26,802
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Computer-aided diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a rapidly developing field of neuroimaging with strong potential to be used in practice. 4 key findings →
Participants: 165
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
APOE ɛ4 was associated with atrophic hippocampal volume in MRI markers, increased cerebral amyloid deposition and cerebral hypometabolism. 4 key findings →
Design: systematic review
Participants: 1,628
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2014-11-01
Analysis confirmed the association of APOE with earlier AAO (P = 3.3 × 10(-96)), with associations in CR1 (rs6701713, P = 7.2 × 10(-4)), BIN1 (rs7561528, P = 4.8 × 10(-4)), and PICALM (rs561655, P = 2.2 × 10(-3)) reaching statistical significance (P Conclusions and relevance We confirmed an association of APOE (OMIM 107741) variants with AAO among affected participants with LOAD and observed novel associations of CR1 (OMIM 120620), BIN1 (OMIM 601248), and PICALM (OMIM 603025) with AAO. 3 key findings →
Design: meta-analysis
Participants: 9,162
Evidence: high
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
72/100
✓ Peer-reviewed
alzhub usefulness score 72 out of 100.
·
JAMA neurology
·
2014-12-01
Of these, 4361 (8.4%) developed dementia compared with 6610 patients with NTT (5.9%) (P Conclusions and relevance Among patients evaluated in the ED or inpatient settings, those with moderate to severe TBI at 55 years or older or mild TBI at 65 years or older had an increased risk of developing dementia. 3 key findings →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 164,661
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.
·
Neurology
·
2014-03-05
A larger number of deaths are attributable to AD dementia in the United States each year than the number (<84,000 in 2010) reported on death certificates. 1 key finding →
Design: cohort study
Participants: 2,566
Evidence: moderate
Full summary, score breakdown and related studies →
Original source
Free full text
Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) increases dementia risk with no pharmacologic treatment available. 4 key findings →
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.