ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)
Estimating the optimal cutoff for the IGT-AD Distress subscale adapted for amyloid PET results disclosure.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Estimating the optimal cutoff for the IGT-AD Distress subscale adapted for amyloid PET results disclosure.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionResearch on diagnostic and biomarker disclosure has significantly increased, particularly in the field of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The psychological impact of learning amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) results has been frequently assessed using the Impact of Genetic Testing for Alzheimer's Disease (IGT-AD) instrument. Establishing an optimal cutoff score for this screening tool is essential for efficiently identifying individuals who may require psychological support after amyloid PET disclosure. In this study, we aimed to determine the optimal distress cutoff for the adapted IGT-AD instrument after amyloid PET result disclosure in cognitively symptomatic older adults.
methodsWe adapted the IGT-AD instrument by replacing reference to genetic testing with reference to amyloid PET testing. A total of 98 participants with either mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia were assessed for psychological impact using this adapted instrument and the Impact of Event Scale (IES; cutoff = 26) as a gold standard. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined the optimal distress cutoff, with the Youden index maximizing sensitivity and specificity. The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated to evaluate the predictive accuracy of the IGT-AD.
resultsThe mean age of participants was 72.6 years, 41.8% were male, 77.6% were White, 16.3% were Black, and 15.3% were of Hispanic ethnicity. Most (57.2%) held bachelor or post-bachelor degrees, and 73.5% were married or cohabiting. The optimal cutoff point for the modified IGT-AD Distress subscale was determined to be 15, with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 70.1%. The AUC for distress was 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.95), indicating good predictive power. DISCUSSION: A distress score ≥ 15 on the adapted IGT-AD appears to be a suitable cutoff for detecting significant psychological distress in cognitively symptomatic individuals learning their amyloid PET result. This cutoff has potential clinical and research applications for screening and early intervention. Highlights: The Impact of Genetic Testing for Alzheimer's Disease (IGT-AD) instrument is widely used to assess the psychological impact of Alzheimer's disease biomarker disclosure.Establishing a cutoff score is essential for identifying individuals needing psychological support.Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined the optimal IGT-AD distress cutoff, using Impact of Event Scale (cutoff = 26) as the gold standard.The optimal cutoff for moderate to severe distress on the adapted IGT-AD is 15.Larger studies are needed to validate this cutoff.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.