ArticleInternal medicine (Tokyo, Japan)2023
The Assessment of the Diagnostic Delay in Japanese People with Parkinson's Disease Using a Web-based Survey of Patients and Physicians.
Article in Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identifying the Diagnostic Challenges and Indicators of Orthostatic Tremor: Patient Perspectives.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Article
- Time is health: management of Parkinson's disease in primary care: a retrospective quantitative study of diagnostic and therapeutic timelines.BMC primary care · 2025Observational
- Predictive modeling to uncover Parkinson's disease characteristics that delay diagnosis.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Although diagnostic criteria of Parkinson's disease (PD) have been established, the details of the process by which patients notice symptoms, visit a physician, and receive a diagnosis of PD is unclear. We therefore explored factors influencing latency in diagnosing PD. Methods We performed an internet-based survey of patients with PD and their families as well as physicians treating patients with PD to identify any diagnostic latency and its determinants. Evaluated factors included motor and non-motor symptoms, the diagnosis history and symptoms, patients' feelings toward PD prior to the diagnosis, and physician-determined reasons for the diagnostic delay. Results Among the 186 eligible patient respondents (including 87 responses from family members of patients), 24% received a PD diagnosis >1 year after the onset of PD-related symptoms, 58.6% had mid- or late-stage PD at the diagnosis, and 29% of patients had initially thought their symptoms were common age-related phenomena. Tremor (42%) was the most frequent symptom that led patients to visit a medical institution, whereas gait disturbance (14%) was the least frequent. More patients diagnosed with early-stage PD than those diagnosed with mid- or late-stage PD consulted a neurologist at their first visit. Among the 331 eligible physicians, patients' misinterpretation of their symptoms as being age-related was deemed one of or the most common cause (s) of a diagnostic delay by 67% and 36%, respectively. Conclusion Patients' insufficient or misinterpreted information about PD may cause delays in accessing healthcare services, leading to diagnostic delay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.