This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

74/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 74 out of 100. Treatments

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Plain-language summary

Objective To assess the short-term psychological outcomes of disclosing amyloid positron emission tomography results to older adults who did not have cognitive impairment. Participants aged 65 to 85 years who had no known cognitive impairments underwent an amyloid positron emission tomography scan and learned their result from an investigator who used a protocol-specified process that included prescan education and psychological assessments. Exposures A personal biomarker result described as either an elevated or not elevated amyloid level. Results A total of 1167 participants with elevated amyloid levels and 538 participants with not elevated amyloid levels were included. Compared with participants who learned that they had a not elevated amyloid result, individuals who learned of an elevated amyloid result were no more likely to experience short-term increases in depression (mean [SD] change in the Geriatric Depression Scale score, 0.02 [1.3] vs 0.04 [1.3]; P = .90), anxiety (mean [SD] change in State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score, -0.02 [3.2] vs -0.15 [3.0]; P = .65), or suicidality (mean [SD] change in the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale score, 0.0 [0.4] vs -0.01 [0.5]; P = .67). Participants with elevated amyloid levels had increased Concern About AD scores (raw change in scores: elevated amyloid group, 0.8 [3.9]; not elevated amyloid group, -0.4 [3.8]; P Conclusions and relevance In this observational preclinical AD study, participants who learned they had elevated amyloid levels did not experience short-term negative psychological sequelae compared with persons who learned they did not have elevated amyloid levels.

What this study adds

Evidence grade: High

This is a follow-up (cohort) study of 1,167 participants. In this study of 1,167 participants with elevated amyloid and 538 with not elevated amyloid who had no cognitive impairment, learning an elevated amyloid result did not increase short-term depression, anxiety, or suicidality compared with learning a not elevated result. Reported effect size: 60.1%; 94.5%; 96.1%.

Taken from this record’s own fields, not from reading the paper. The grade is assigned from the abstract’s wording; what that means.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Grill, J. D., Raman, R., Ernstrom, K., Sultzer, D. L., Burns, J. M., Donohue, M. C., et al. (2020). Short-term Psychological Outcomes of Disclosing Amyloid Imaging Results to Research Participants Who Do Not Have Cognitive Impairment. JAMA neurology. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2734

Vancouver

Grill JD, Raman R, Ernstrom K, Sultzer DL, Burns JM, Donohue MC, et al. Short-term Psychological Outcomes of Disclosing Amyloid Imaging Results to Research Participants Who Do Not Have Cognitive Impairment. JAMA neurology. 2020. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2734. PMID: 32777010.

BibTeX

@article{grill2020-32777010,
  author  = {Grill, J. D. and Raman, R. and Ernstrom, K. and Sultzer, D. L. and Burns, J. M. and Donohue, M. C. and Johnson, K. A. and Aisen, P. S. and others},
  title   = {{Short-term Psychological Outcomes of Disclosing Amyloid Imaging Results to Research Participants Who Do Not Have Cognitive Impairment}},
  journal = {JAMA neurology},
  year    = {2020},
  doi     = {10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2734},
  pmid    = {32777010},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2734}
}

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.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record lists 1,167 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record reports “60.1%; 94.5%; 96.1%”. A statistically significant result can still be small in daily life.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded high. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. High means the abstract mentions a randomized design, a meta-analysis or a systematic review. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Objective To assess the short-term psychological outcomes of disclosing amyloid positron emission tomography results to older adults who did not have cognitive impairment.
Participants aged 65 to 85 years who had no known cognitive impairments underwent an amyloid positron emission tomography scan and learned their result from an investigator who used a protocol-specified process that included prescan education and psychological assessments.
Exposures A personal biomarker result described as either an elevated or not elevated amyloid level.
Results A total of 1167 participants with elevated amyloid levels and 538 participants with not elevated amyloid levels were included.
Compared with participants who learned that they had a not elevated amyloid result, individuals who learned of an elevated amyloid result were no more likely to experience short-term increases in depression (mean [SD] change in the Geriatric Depression Scale score, 0.02 [1.3] vs 0.04 [1.3]; P = .90), anxiety (mean [SD] change in State-Trait Anxiety Inventory score, -0.02 [3.2] vs -0.15 [3.0]; P = .65), or suicidality (mean [SD] change in the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale score, 0.0 [0.4] vs -0.01 [0.5]; P = .67).

Why it matters

In this study of 1,167 participants with elevated amyloid and 538 with not elevated amyloid who had no cognitive impairment, learning an elevated amyloid result did not increase short-term depression, anxiety, or suicidality compared with learning a not elevated result. Those with elevated amyloid did have increased Concern About AD scores.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Study designcohort study
Participants1,167
Effect size60.1%; 94.5%; 96.1%
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 74/100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a large phase 3 trial. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 71 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 74 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (JAMA neurology)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	JAMA Neurology: journal h-index 235 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	11 / 12	A large phase 3 trial (from PubMed type “Clinical Trial, Phase III”)
Strength of evidence	5 / 5	Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	2 / 5	2020 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	3 / 4	1,167 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)
Randomized / blinded	1 / 2	Randomized (as stated in the record)
Times cited	4 / 7	Cited 97 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	3 / 5	12.1 citations a year over 8 year(s) since 2020
Impact for its field and year	3 / 6	Cited 6.9× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	2 / 6	Cited by 8 other studies in this library
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 54 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	3 / 3	Harvard University: institution h-index 3,235 (OpenAlex)
Multicenter collaboration	3 / 3	OpenAlex lists 10 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 32777010)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	71 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 71 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 74 out of 100.
Total	74 / 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).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Studies this one cites

Referenced by this study and also in the alzhub library, so you can read them here. Showing 12 of 14.

Later studies that cite this one

8 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.

Related studies in Treatments from nearby years

Also tagged “machine”

834 studies in the library carry the topic tag “machine”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 834 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Treatments

See all studies in Treatments →