Home › Research › Risk factors
Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study
Peggye Dilworth‐Anderson, Jon Steingrimsson, Karen Smith, Emily Glavin, Lucy Hanna, Christopher J. Weber, Gil D. Rabinovici, Ilana Gareen et al.. Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), 2026-06-04
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 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, so that was left out: it earned 39 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 1 / 4 | Last-listed author B.V. Siegel: h-index 6 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: institution h-index 1,674 (OpenAlex) |
| Multi-centre collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 1 institution(s) in 1 country — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 39 / 96 | Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.17615/agh3-gz31
- Original source →
- Free full text: Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) →
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
Dilworth‐Anderson, P., Steingrimsson, J., Smith, K., Glavin, E., Hanna, L., Weber, C. J., et al. (2026). Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study. Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill). https://doi.org/10.17615/agh3-gz31
Vancouver
Dilworth‐Anderson P, Steingrimsson J, Smith K, Glavin E, Hanna L, Weber CJ, et al. Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study. Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill). 2026. doi:10.17615/agh3-gz31.
BibTeX
@article{dilworthanderson2026-8139bdf8,
author = {Dilworth‐Anderson, Peggye and Steingrimsson, Jon and Smith, Karen and Glavin, Emily and Hanna, Lucy and Weber, Christopher J. and Rabinovici, Gil D. and Gareen, Ilana and others},
title = {{Differences in amyloid PET positivity based on ethnoracial group and social determinants of health: The new IDEAS study}},
journal = {Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.17615/agh3-gz31},
url = {https://doi.org/10.17615/agh3-gz31}
}
Related studies in Risk factors
Also tagged “amyloid-beta”
1,339 studies in the library carry the topic tag “amyloid-beta”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,339 tagged studies.