Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29197423›Full record

ArticleAlzheimer's research & therapy2017

Amnestic MCI patients' experiences after disclosure of their amyloid PET result in a research context.

Gwendolien Vanderschaeghe, Jolien Schaeverbeke, Rose Bruffaerts, Rik Vandenberghe, Kris Dierickx

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Alzheimer's research & therapy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Outcomes of clinical utility in amyloid-PET studies: state of art and future perspectives.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Facing the new diagnostic and treatment options of Alzheimer's disease: The necessity of informed consent.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Counseling and disclosure practices in predictive Alzheimer's disease diagnostics: A scoping review.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Article
  12. Psychological outcomes of dementia risk estimation in MCI patients: Results from the PreDADQoL project.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Biomarker disclosure protocols in prodromal Alzheimer's disease clinical trials.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Gwendolien VanderschaegheDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35 Blok D, Box 7001, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. vanderschaeghe.gwendolien@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7258-2025
Jolien SchaeverbekeDepartment of Neurosciences, Laboratory for Cognitive Neurology, KU Leuven, O&N II, Herestraat 49, Box 1021, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Rose BruffaertsDepartment of Neurosciences, Laboratory for Cognitive Neurology, KU Leuven, O&N II, Herestraat 49, Box 1021, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Rik VandenbergheDepartment of Neurosciences, Laboratory for Cognitive Neurology, KU Leuven, O&N II, Herestraat 49, Box 1021, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. rik.vandenberghe@uzleuven.be.
Kris DierickxDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Kapucijnenvoer 35 Blok D, Box 7001, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

IWT The project number is 120836: "Biomarker-Based Adaptive Development in AD."
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomarkers such as amyloid imaging are increasingly used for diagnosis in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease. Very few studies have examined this from the perspective of the patient. To date, there is only limited evidence about how patients experience and value disclosure in an early disease stage.

methodsSemistructured interviews were carried out with 38 patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment as part of an investigator-driven diagnostic trial (EudraCT, 2013-004671-12; registered on 20 June 2014) in which participants could opt to know the binary outcome (positive/negative) result of their amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) scan. Verbatim transcripts of the interviews were evaluated using qualitative content analysis and NVivo 11 software.

resultsEight of 38 patients received a positive amyloid PET scan result, and the remaining 30 patients received a negative amyloid PET scan result. After disclosure of the result to the patients, we interviewed each patient twice: 2 weeks after disclosure and 6 months after disclosure. Patients had difficulties in repeating the exact words used during disclosure of their amyloid PET scan result by the neurologist; yet, they could recall the core message of the result in their own words. Some patients were confused by the terminology of an amyloid-positive/negative test result. At 6 months, two of eight patients with a positive amyloid PET scan result experienced emotional difficulties (sadness, feeling worried). Three of 30 patients with a negative amyloid PET scan result started to doubt whether they had received the correct result. Patients reported that they experienced advantages after the disclosure, such as information about their health status, the possibility of making practical arrangements, medication, enjoying life more, and a positive impact on relationships. They also reported disadvantages following disclosure, such as having emotional difficulties, feeling worried about when their symptoms might worsen, the risk of a more patronizing attitude by relatives, and the possibility of a wrong diagnosis.

conclusionsThis exploratory study shows that the majority of patients can accurately recall the information received during disclosure. The experienced advantages and disadvantages reported by our patients depended on the outcome of the result (positive or negative) and the interval of the conducted interview (2 weeks or 6 months after amyloid PET disclosure). Discrepancies were found between patients' expectations according to the interview prior to amyloid PET disclosure (Vanderschaeghe et al. [Neuroethics. 2017;10:281-97]) and their actual experiences after their amyloid PET disclosure.

Indexed as

DisclosurePositron-Emission TomographyAgedAged, 80 and overAmyloidCognitive DysfunctionEarly DiagnosisEmotionsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesAmyloidAmnestic MCIAmyloid PETBelgiumBiomarkerDisclosureEthicsIndividual research resultsMCI due to ADQualitative researchResearch

Identifiers

PMID29197423
PMCPMC5712105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.