Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35895005›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2022

Application of longitudinal item response theory models to modeling Parkinson's disease progression.

Haotian Zou, Varun Aggarwal, Glenn T Stebbins, Martijn L T M Müller, Jesse M Cedarbaum, Anne Pedata, Diane Stephenson, Tanya Simuni, Sheng Luo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Tips and tricks in tremor treatment.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Role of dopamine agonists in Parkinson's disease therapy.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Haotian ZouUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3595-8716
Varun AggarwalCritical Path Institute, Tucson, Arizona, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8406-0961
Glenn T StebbinsRush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Martijn L T M MüllerCritical Path Institute, Tucson, Arizona, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1133-7202
Jesse M CedarbaumCoeruleus Clinical Sciences LLC, Woodbridge, Connecticut, USA.
Anne PedataCritical Path Institute, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Diane StephensonCritical Path Institute, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Tanya SimuniNorthwestern University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Sheng LuoDuke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

Resource Core 3 - Metabolomics CoreP30AG028716 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Sarah B. Peskoe · 2006 to 2026
$24.6M
Research Education Component CoreP30AG072958 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI GWENN A GARDEN, Heather E. Whitson · 2021 to 2026
$24.1M
Integrative modeling and dynamic prediction of Alzheimer's diseaseR01AG064803 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI LUO, SHENG · 2020 to 2024
$2.3M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG028716NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072958NIA NIH HHS P30AG072958NIA NIH HHS R01 AG064803
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Movement Disorder Society revised version of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) parts 2 and 3 reflect patient-reported functional impact and clinician-reported severity of motor signs of Parkinson's disease (PD), respectively. Total scores are common clinical outcomes but may obscure important time-based changes in items. We aim to analyze longitudinal disease progression based on MDS-UPRDS parts 2 and 3 item-level responses over time and as functions of Hoehn & Yahr (H&Y) stages 1 and 2 for subjects with early PD. The longitudinal item response theory (IRT) modeling is a novel statistical method addressing limitations in traditional linear regression approaches, such as ignoring varying item sensitivities and the sum score balancing out improvements and declines. We utilized a harmonized dataset consisting of six studies with 3573 subjects with early PD and 14,904 visits, and mean follow-up time of 2.5 years (±1.57). We applied both a unidimensional (each part separately) and multidimensional (both parts combined) longitudinal IRT models. We assessed the progression rates for both parts, anchored to baseline H&Y stages 1 and 2. Both the uni- and multidimensional longitudinal IRT models indicate significant worsening time effects in both parts 2 and 3. Baseline H&Y stage 2 was associated with significantly higher baseline severities, but slower progression rates in both parts, as compared with stage 1. Patients with baseline H&Y stage 1 demonstrated slower progression in part 2 severity compared to part 3, whereas patients with baseline H&Y stage 2 progressed faster in part 2 than part 3. The multidimensional model had a superior fit compared to the unidimensional models and it had excellent model performance.

Indexed as

Parkinson DiseaseDisease ProgressionHumansMental Status and Dementia TestsSeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID35895005
PMCPMC9574723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.