ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024
Evaluation of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease: electronic vs. conventional paper diaries.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Paper symptom diaries are a common tool for assessing motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients, but there are concerns about inaccuracies in the assessment of motor fluctuation due to recall bias and poor compliance. We, therefore, developed an electronic diary with reminder and real-time recording functions. Objectives and methods: To evaluate the effectiveness of the electronic diary, we compared compliance and motor fluctuation assessment with a paper diary. Nineteen PD patients were recruited and recorded paper diaries every 30 min from 8 am to 8 pm for 7 days, followed by 7 days of electronic diary recording using a smartphone and smartwatch. Prior to the recording period, the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ)-39 and the Movement Disorders Society-sponsored Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale-Revised (MDS-UPDRS) 1, 2, 3, 4 were measured. Patients completed a patient questionnaire on the usability of the diaries after the recording period. Results: Total reported time was significantly longer in paper diaries, but there was no significant difference in the number of entries (paper 115 [71-147] vs. electronic 109 [93-116], Conclusion: Electronic diaries are useful tools that more accurately reflect PD motor fluctuations.
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.