Home › Research › Biomarkers
Appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET: a report of the Amyloid Imaging Task Force, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the Alzheimer's Association
Johnson KA, Minoshima S, Bohnen NI, Donohoe KJ, Foster NL, Herscovitch P, Karlawish JH, Rowe CC et al.. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2013-01-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Positron emission tomography (PET) of brain amyloid b is a technology that is becoming more available, but its clinical utility in medical practice requires careful definition. To provide guidance to dementia care practitioners, patients, and caregivers, the Alzheimer's Association and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging convened the Amyloid Imaging Taskforce (AIT). The AIT considered a broad range of specific clinical scenarios in which amyloid PET could potentially be used appropriately. Peer-reviewed, published literature was searched to ascertain available evidence relevant to these scenarios, and the AIT developed a consensus of expert opinion. Although empirical evidence of impact on clinical outcomes is not yet available, a set of specific appropriate use criteria (AUC) were agreed on that define the types of patients and clinical circumstances in which amyloid PET could be used. Both appropriate and inappropriate uses were considered and formulated,and are reported and discussed here. Because both dementia care and amyloid PET technology are in active development, these AUC will require periodic reassessment. Future research directions are also outlined, including diagnostic utility and patient-centered outcomes.
Key findings
- Peer-reviewed, published literature was searched to ascertain available evidence relevant to these scenarios, and the AIT developed a consensus of expert opinion.
- Although empirical evidence of impact on clinical outcomes is not yet available, a set of specific appropriate use criteria (AUC) were agreed on that define the types of patients and clinical circumstances in which amyloid PET could be used.
- Both appropriate and inappropriate uses were considered and formulated,and are reported and discussed here.
- Because both dementia care and amyloid PET technology are in active development, these AUC will require periodic reassessment.
- Future research directions are also outlined, including diagnostic utility and patient-centered outcomes.
Why it matters
A task force convened by the Alzheimer's Association and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging searched the published literature and reached a "consensus of expert opinion" on which patients and clinical situations amyloid PET brain scans could appropriately be used for, and which uses are inappropriate. The authors state that "empirical evidence of impact on clinical outcomes is not yet available", so these are expert criteria and not proof that scanning helps patients. They also say the criteria "will require periodic reassessment" as dementia care and the technology change, so check for a newer version before relying on this 2013 report.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Blood tests & biomarkers →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 55/100
Published in a leading specialty journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 9 / 10 | Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | Alzheimer s & Dementia: journal h-index 228 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2013 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 6 / 7 | Cited 600 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 4 / 5 | 40.0 citations a year over 15 year(s) since 2013 |
| Impact for its field and year | 5 / 6 | Cited 32.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 4 / 6 | Cited by 63 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 3 / 4 | Cited 105 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author William H. Thies: h-index 23 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 3 / 3 | University of Washington: institution h-index 3,540 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 3 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 16 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 23360977) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Total | 55 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — PubMed Central lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 10 Oct 2026).
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Johnson, K. A., Minoshima, S., Bohnen, N. I., Donohoe, K. J., Foster, N. L., Herscovitch, P., et al. (2013). Appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET: a report of the Amyloid Imaging Task Force, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the Alzheimer's Association. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2013.01.002
Vancouver
Johnson KA, Minoshima S, Bohnen NI, Donohoe KJ, Foster NL, Herscovitch P, et al. Appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET: a report of the Amyloid Imaging Task Force, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the Alzheimer's Association. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2013.01.002. PMID: 23360977.
BibTeX
@article{johnson2013-23360977,
author = {Johnson, K. A. and Minoshima, S. and Bohnen, N. I. and Donohoe, K. J. and Foster, N. L. and Herscovitch, P. and Karlawish, J. H. and Rowe, C. C. and others},
title = {{Appropriate use criteria for amyloid PET: a report of the Amyloid Imaging Task Force, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, and the Alzheimer's Association}},
journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1016/j.jalz.2013.01.002},
pmid = {23360977},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2013.01.002}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 40.
Later studies that cite this one
63 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references. Showing the 8 highest-scoring.
Related studies in Biomarkers
Also tagged “classification”
835 studies in the library carry the topic tag “classification”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 835 tagged studies.