Home › Research › Risk factors
Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study
Corey J. Bolton, Peggye Dilworth‐Anderson, Jon Steingrimsson, Maryanne Thangarajah, Lucy Hanna, Constantine Gatsonis, Charles Windon, María C. Carrillo et al.. Alzheimer s & Dementia, 2026-05-01
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Among 5757 participants (21.7% Black, 20.3% Latinx, 58.1% AORE), we found lower odds of amyloid positivity in Black (odds ratio [OR]: 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.83) and Latinx (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.91) compared to AORE. Individuals in the comfortable (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.05-1.42) and distressed (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08-1.82) Area Deprivation Index (ADI) groups had greater odds of amyloid positivity than individuals in the prosperous group. Amyloid PET positivity rates were lower among Black and Latinx individuals and higher among individuals in more deprived ADI categories. This has potential implications for anti-amyloid therapies.
Key findings
- Among 5757 participants (21.7% Black, 20.3% Latinx, 58.1% AORE), we found lower odds of amyloid positivity in Black (odds ratio [OR]: 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.83) and Latinx (OR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.91) compared to AORE.
- Individuals in the comfortable (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.05-1.42) and distressed (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08-1.82) Area Deprivation Index (ADI) groups had greater odds of amyloid positivity than individuals in the prosperous group.
- Amyloid PET positivity rates were lower among Black and Latinx individuals and higher among individuals in more deprived ADI categories.
- This has potential implications for anti-amyloid therapies.
Why it matters
This study found that amyloid PET scans were less often positive in Black and Latinx participants and more often positive in people from more deprived neighborhoods. It does not test any treatment, but the authors note the findings may matter for anti-amyloid therapies.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Participants5,757
- Effect size21.7%; 20.3%; 58.1%
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 46/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Alzheimer s & Dementia) |
| 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 | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 3 / 4 | 5,757 participants |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 2 year(s) since 2026 |
| Impact for its field and year | 0 / 6 | Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 2 / 4 | Last-listed author Consuelo Hopkins Wilkins: h-index 47 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | Washington University in St. Louis: institution h-index 1,962 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 3 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 12 institution(s) in 1 country |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 42200449) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 46 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
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
Bolton, C. J., Dilworth‐Anderson, P., Steingrimsson, J., Thangarajah, M., Hanna, L., Gatsonis, C., et al. (2026). Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study. Alzheimer s & Dementia. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.71406
Vancouver
Bolton CJ, Dilworth‐Anderson P, Steingrimsson J, Thangarajah M, Hanna L, Gatsonis C, et al. Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study. Alzheimer s & Dementia. 2026. doi:10.1002/alz.71406. PMID: 42200449.
BibTeX
@article{bolton2026-42200449,
author = {Bolton, Corey J. and Dilworth‐Anderson, Peggye and Steingrimsson, Jon and Thangarajah, Maryanne and Hanna, Lucy and Gatsonis, Constantine and Windon, Charles and Carrillo, María C. and others},
title = {{Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study}},
journal = {Alzheimer s \& Dementia},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.1002/alz.71406},
pmid = {42200449},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.71406}
}
Studies this one cites
Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 20.