Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36190710›Full record

ArticleJAMA neurology2022

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Amyloid PET Positivity in Individuals With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia: A Secondary Analysis of the Imaging Dementia-Evidence for Amyloid Scanning (IDEAS) Cohort Study.

Consuelo H Wilkins, Charles C Windon, Peggye Dilworth-Anderson, Justin Romanoff, Constantine Gatsonis, Lucy Hanna, Charles Apgar, Ilana F Gareen, Carl V Hill, Bruce E Hillner and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
19.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Association of cognitive impairment and APOE ε4 with Centiloids in Hispanic and non-Hispanic White cohorts.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Usage and positivity rates of Alzheimer's disease biomarkers in a memory clinic.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Cognitive screening biases in a secondary prevention Alzheimer's disease clinical trial.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. Reinventing "N" in the A/T/N framework: The case for digital.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2025
    Article

31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Consuelo H WilkinsDepartment of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Charles C WindonDepartment of Neurology, Memory and Aging Center, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco.
Peggye Dilworth-AndersonHealth Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Justin RomanoffCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Constantine GatsonisCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Lucy HannaCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Charles ApgarCenter for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia.
Ilana F GareenCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Carl V HillAlzheimer's Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Bruce E HillnerDepartment of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.
Andrew MarchCenter for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Barry A SiegelEdward Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Rachel A WhitmerDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, California.
Maria C CarrilloAlzheimer's Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Gil D RabinoviciDepartment of Neurology, Memory and Aging Center, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco.
Brown University · USAlzheimer's Association · USAmerican College of Radiology · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USMallinckrodt (United States) · USUniversity of California, Davis · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · USVirginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

UC Davis Alzheimer's Disease Research CenterP30AG072972 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI Charles DeCarli, Rachel A Whitmer · 2021 to 2026
$25.2M
Reimagining Precision Medicine Approaches to AD DiagnosisR35AG072362 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI POSSIN, KATHERINE LAUREL, RABINOVICI, GIL DAN · 2021 to 2025
$4.8M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072972NIA NIH HHS R35 AG072362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Racial and ethnic groups with higher rates of clinical Alzheimer disease (AD) are underrepresented in studies of AD biomarkers, including amyloid positron emission tomography (PET). Objective: To compare amyloid PET positivity among a diverse cohort of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: Secondary analysis of the Imaging Dementia-Evidence for Amyloid Scanning (IDEAS), a single-arm multisite cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries who met appropriate-use criteria for amyloid PET imaging between February 2016 and September 2017 with follow-up through January 2018. Data were analyzed between April 2020 and January 2022. This study used 2 approaches: the McNemar test to compare amyloid PET positivity proportions between matched racial and ethnic groups and multivariable logistic regression to assess the odds of having a positive amyloid PET scan. IDEAS enrolled participants at 595 US dementia specialist practices. A total of 21 949 were enrolled and 4842 (22%) were excluded from the present analysis due to protocol violations, not receiving an amyloid PET scan, not having a positive or negative scan, or because of small numbers in some subgroups. Exposures: In the IDEAS study, participants underwent a single amyloid PET scan. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were amyloid PET positivity proportions and odds. Results: Data from 17 107 individuals (321 Asian, 635 Black, 829 Hispanic, and 15 322 White) with MCI or dementia and amyloid PET were analyzed between April 2020 and January 2022. The median (range) age of participants was 75 (65-105) years; 8769 participants (51.3%) were female and 8338 (48.7%) were male. In the optimal 1:1 matching analysis (n = 3154), White participants had a greater proportion of positive amyloid PET scans compared with Asian participants (181 of 313; 57.8%; 95% CI, 52.3-63.2 vs 142 of 313; 45.4%; 95% CI, 39.9-50.9, respectively; P = .001) and Hispanic participants (482 of 780; 61.8%; 95% CI, 58.3-65.1 vs 425 of 780; 54.5%; 95% CI, 51.0-58.0, respectively; P = .003) but not Black participants (359 of 615; 58.4%; 95% CI, 54.4-62.2 vs 333 of 615; 54.1%; 95% CI, 50.2-58.0, respectively; P = .13). In the adjusted model, the odds of having a positive amyloid PET scan were lower for Asian participants (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37-0.59; P < .001), Black participants (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.84; P < .001), and Hispanic participants (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.59-0.79; P < .001) compared with White participants. Conclusions and Relevance: Racial and ethnic differences found in amyloid PET positivity among individuals with MCI and dementia in this study may indicate differences in underlying etiology of cognitive impairment and guide future treatment and prevention approaches.

Identifiers

PMID36190710
PMCPMC9531087
OpenAlexW4300689971

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.