Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39559870›Full record

ArticleThe journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease2024

Informing Alzheimer's Biomarker Communication: Concerns and Understanding of Cognitively Unimpaired Adults During Amyloid Results Disclosure.

F B Ketchum, C M Erickson, K E Basche, N A Chin, M L Eveler, C E Conway, D M Coughlin, L R Clark

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Dementia risk factors and biomarkers in subjective cognitive decline: real world evidence from the monza brain health service.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Return of research results across the Alzheimer's Disease Research Centers network.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

F B KetchumFred B. Ketchum, Department of Neurology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1685 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705, USA, Phone (608) 265-5523, Fax (608) 263-0412, fketchum@neurology.wisc.edu.
C M Erickson
K E Basche
N A Chin
M L Eveler
C E Conway
D M Coughlin
L R Clark

Funding

The Longitudinal Course of Neural Function and Amyloid in People At Risk for ADR01AG021155 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Sterling C Johnson · 2004 to 2026
$27.0M
Preparing for Blood-Based Alzheimer’s Disease Biomarker Testing in Diverse Populations: Development of a Decision-Support Tool for Primary CareK99AG083131 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI KETCHUM, FRED · 2023 to 2024
$275k
NIA NIH HHS K99 AG083131NIA NIH HHS R01 AG021155
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomarker results are increasingly disclosed in research and clinical settings, but less is known about how individuals interpret their results or concerns raised during the disclosure visit that may need to be addressed by clinicians to ensure appropriate disclosure.

methodsFifty-two cognitively unimpaired older adults aged 65 to 89 years old from the Wisconsin Registry for Alzheimer's Prevention, who had undergone an amyloid PET scan in the previous 18 months, were enrolled in the disclosure substudy. After ensuring psychological readiness, trained study clinicians disclosed amyloid PET results using a structured protocol. We assessed participants' level of understanding, concerns, and the perceived personal significance of their biomarker results during the disclosure visit through a series of question prompts in real-time.

resultsThirty-four received a non-elevated amyloid result and 18 received an elevated result. The average age was 72.2 years (range 65-81); most were women (64%) and non-Hispanic White (92%). Participants understood their results (98%), and both non-elevated and elevated groups provided similar responses around topics of sharing with others, privacy, accuracy of testing, and risk. Participants with elevated results were significantly more likely than those with non-elevated results to want to change their lifestyle (78% vs 12%, p=<0.01) and have questions about their results (61% vs 30%, p=0.05). Participants interpreted the personal significance of results in terms of several themes relating to individual risk status, emotional impact, whether the result was expected, and prevention/planning.

conclusionResults show that participants understand their biomarker results, and have a number of concerns during the disclosure process that clinical and research protocols could address. en These findings could be important considerations as effective processes are developed for widespread biomarker disclosure in clinical and research settings.

Indexed as

Alzheimer DiseaseBiomarkersPositron-Emission TomographyAgedAged, 80 and overCommunicationComprehensionDisclosureFemaleHumansMaleTruth DisclosureBiomarkersAD biomarkersAlzheimer’s DiseaseAmyloidbiomarker disclosuredementia educationethics and communicationpreclinical AD

Identifiers

PMID39559870
PMCPMC11573811

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.