Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37812437›Full record

ArticleJAMA neurology2023

Amyloid Positron Emission Tomography and Subsequent Health Care Use Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Dementia.

Gil D Rabinovici, Maria C Carrillo, Charles Apgar, Ilana F Gareen, Roee Gutman, Lucy Hanna, Bruce E Hillner, Andrew March, Justin Romanoff, Barry A Siegel and 5 more

Open access · greenAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Clinical outcomes up to 9 years after [Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2023
    Article
  12. 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

15 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Gil D RabinoviciDepartment of Neurology, Memory and Aging Center, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Maria C CarrilloAlzheimer's Association, Chicago, Illinois.
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.
Roee GutmanCenter 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.
Bruce E HillnerDepartment of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.
Andrew MarchCenter for Research and Innovation, American College of Radiology, Reston, Virginia.
Justin RomanoffCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Barry A SiegelEdward Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri.
Karen SmithDepartment of Neurology, Memory and Aging Center, Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco.
Yunjie SongCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Christopher WeberAlzheimer's Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Rachel A WhitmerDepartment of Public Health Sciences and Neurology, University of California, Davis, Davis.
Constantine GatsonisCenter for Statistical Sciences, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island.
Brown University · USAlzheimer's Association · USAmerican College of Radiology · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USMallinckrodt (United States) · USUniversity of California, Davis · 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
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072972
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Results of amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) have been shown to change the management of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia who meet Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC). Objective: To determine if amyloid PET is associated with reduced hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits over 12 months in patients with MCI or dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized controlled trial analyzed participants in the Imaging Dementia-Evidence for Amyloid Scanning (IDEAS) study, an open-label, multisite, longitudinal study that enrolled participants between February 2016 and December 2017 and followed up through December 2018. These participants were recruited at 595 clinical sites that provide specialty memory care across the US. Eligible participants were Medicare beneficiaries 65 years or older with a diagnosis of MCI or dementia within the past 24 months who met published AUC for amyloid PET. Each IDEAS study participant was matched to a control Medicare beneficiary who had not undergone amyloid PET. Data analysis was conducted on December 13, 2022. Exposure: Participants underwent amyloid PET at imaging centers. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end points were the proportions of patients with 12-month inpatient hospital admissions and ED visits. One of 4 secondary end points was the rate of hospitalizations and rate of ED visits in participants with positive vs negative amyloid PET results. Health care use was ascertained from Medicare claims data. Results: The 2 cohorts (IDEAS study participants and controls) each comprised 12 684 adults, including 6467 females (51.0%) with a median (IQR) age of 77 (73-81) years. Over 12 months, 24.0% of the IDEAS study participants were hospitalized, compared with 25.1% of the matched control cohort, for a relative reduction of -4.49% (97.5% CI, -9.09% to 0.34%). The 12-month ED visit rates were nearly identical between the 2 cohorts (44.8% in both IDEAS study and control cohorts) for a relative reduction of -0.12% (97.5% CI, -3.19% to 3.05%). Both outcomes fell short of the prespecified effect size of 10% or greater relative reduction. Overall, 1467 of 6848 participants (21.4%) with positive amyloid PET scans were hospitalized within 12 months compared with 1081 of 4209 participants (25.7%) with negative amyloid PET scans (adjusted odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78-0.89). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this nonrandomized controlled trial showed that use of amyloid PET was not associated with a significant reduction in 12-month hospitalizations or ED visits. Rates of hospitalization were lower in patients with positive vs negative amyloid PET results.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseCognitive DysfunctionDementiaAgedAged, 80 and overAmyloidAmyloidogenic ProteinsDelivery of Health CareFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMedicarePositron-Emission TomographyUnited StatesAmyloidAmyloidogenic Proteins

Identifiers

PMID37812437
PMCPMC10562987
OpenAlexW4387440562

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.