ArticleJournal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996)2016
Predictors of normal and abnormal outcome in clinical brain dopamine transporter imaging.
Article in Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping motor cortex "hand knob" metrics to symptom hemidominance in Parkinson's disease: from width comparison to machine learning.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Dopamine Transporter Imaging, Current Status of a Potential Biomarker: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Individual parkinsonian motor signs and striatal dopamine transporter deficiency: a study with [I-123]FP-CIT SPECT.Journal of neurology · 2019Article
- Visual versus automated analysis of [I-123]FP-CIT SPECT scans in parkinsonism.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain dopamine transporter (DAT) imaging with [(123)I]FP-CIT SPECT can be used to evaluate the integrity of the mesostriatal dopaminergic system in patients with clinically uncertain parkinsonism. To evaluate whether scanning a patient is clinically necessary, it is vital to understand possible factors that affect the scanning result. Therefore, we investigated an unselected sample of 538 consecutively scanned patients from a 6-year period, and the demographic data and indications for DAT SPECT were recorded. After scanning, the patients were divided into groups according to the scanning outcome. Multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate whether the pre-imaging variables had independent associations with the outcome of the scan. Three hundred and three (56.3 %) patients had abnormal scans showing a dopaminergic deficit. The independent factors associated with abnormal scans were older age (p = 0.002), asymmetry of motor symptoms (p = 0.005) and shorter symptom duration (p < 0.001). Re-evaluation of the previously established Parkinson's disease diagnosis was associated with a higher probability of an abnormal scan (74.4 % abnormal, p = 0.004), whereas the possibility of medication-induced parkinsonism was associated with a higher probability of a normal scan (35.4 %, p = 0.036). The probability of an abnormal outcome in clinical brain DAT imaging increases with known risk factors of neurodegenerative parkinsonism. However, a long duration of uncertain motor symptoms and suspicion of medication-induced parkinsonism are associated with a higher probability of a normal outcome. The findings reflect epidemiological factors in parkinsonism together with referral biases that may be used to improve the clinical use of DAT imaging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26676600What 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.