ArticleMovement disorders clinical practice2025
Increasing Sensitivity in Patient-Reported MDS-UPDRS Items for Predicting Medication Initiation in Early PD.
Article in Movement disorders clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal Evaluation of an Abbreviated Patient-Reported Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) for Predicting Dopaminergic Therapy Initiation in Early Parkinson's Disease.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2026Article
- Optimizing Parkinson's disease progression scales using computational methods.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- GLP-1 Signalling as a Therapeutic Avenue in Parkinson's Disease: A Comprehensive Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Can We Better Predict the Timing for Medication Initiation in Early PD?Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Article
- Enhancing Measurement Precision of Patient-Reported Outcomes Using Item Response Theory.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe MDS-UPDRS Parts IB and II are self-reported items providing a direct patient voice to the experiences of PD.
objectiveTo determine the most sensitive combination of MDS-UPDRS Parts IB and II items that accurately predicted the clinically relevant target of dopaminergic therapy initiation.
methodsUtilizing a longitudinal cohort of de novo non-treated PD patients, we applied item response theory (IRT) and survival analysis to assess the relationship between baseline patient-reported symptoms and the later initiation of dopaminergic therapy. The 20 MDS-UPDRS Parts IB and II items were analyzed for their relationship to PD severity (discrimination) and the amount of information they provided in this determination (information). These parameters were used to develop models of predictive accuracy for initiation of dopaminergic therapy.
resultsA six-item version showed a significantly higher C-index as compared to the full 20 item model (P = 0.001). This shortened version of the MDS-UPDRS contained only Part II items and provided a predictive accuracy for initiation of dopaminergic therapy better than the total combined scale score or any other combination.
conclusionsA six-item "Baseline Outcome Voice" version of patient-reported MDS-UPDRS items significantly increases the sensitivity of predicting the key future clinical outcome of starting dopaminergic treatment in early PD. This study also demonstrates how IRT modeling can provide information useful to refining existing measures to identify the most sensitive combination of items honoring the voice of the patient in determining key clinically pertinent decisions. Further research is needed to validate these findings in underrepresented populations.
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.