ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2024
SEND-PD in Parkinsonian Syndromes: Results of a Monocentric Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of diabetes mellitus type two on incidence and progression of Parkinson's disease: a systematic review of longitudinal patient cohorts.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2025Pooled it
- Medication Knowledge of Patients with Parkinson's Disease: Strengths and Gaps.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2026Article
- The Mild Behavioral Impairment Checklist for Parkinson's Disease: An Ancillary Instrument in Cognitive Assessment.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2026Article
- Pathomechanisms of neuropsychiatric disturbances in atypical parkinsonian disorders: a current view.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Neuropsychiatric symptoms in particular impair health-related quality of life (QoL) of patients with Parkinson's disease and atypical Parkinsonian syndromes. For this reason, various scales have been developed for detection of neuropsychiatric symptoms, such as the Scale for evaluation of neuropsychiatric disorders in Parkinson's disease (SEND-PD). Objective: First, the objective of this study was to explore the interrelation between the SEND-PD and clinical parameters in patients with Parkinson's disease and thus confirm its validity. In addition, the applicability in a well-defined cohort of patients with atypical Parkinsonian syndromes was investigated for the very first time. Methods: A clinically well-defined cohort of 122 patients with Parkinson's disease (PD), 55 patients with Progressive Supranuclear Palsy (PSP) and 33 patients with Multiple System Atrophy (MSA) were analyzed. First, the SEND-PD was correlated with established disease-specific scores in patients with PD. Next, the results of the SEND-PD were compared between the different Parkinsonian syndromes. Results: The SEND-PD showed a strong significant correlation with several scores, especially the UPDRS I (Rho = 0.655) and GDS-15 (Rho = 0.645). Depressive burden was significantly higher in MSA patients in comparison to the PD patient cohort (PD, 3.8 ± 3.3; MSA, 5.45 ± 3.87), while PSP patients showed significantly less psychotic (PD 1.6 ± 2.1; PSP 0.6 ± 0.9) and impulse control disorders (PD 0.3 ± 1.0; PSP 0.02 ± 0.1). Conclusion: The SEND-PD is a useful, brief and highly applicable screening tool for neuropsychiatric symptoms in PD, but not in atypical Parkinsonism, as their unique neuropsychiatric symptom composition is not fully captured.
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.