Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39871110›Full record

ArticleAnnals of neurology2025

Validating the Accuracy of Parkinson's Disease Clinical Diagnosis: A UK Brain Bank Case-Control Study.

Lazzaro di Biase, Pasquale Maria Pecoraro, Vincenzo Di Lazzaro

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors.

Lazzaro di BiaseResearch Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology and Neurobiology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8753-757X
Pasquale Maria PecoraroResearch Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology and Neurobiology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6186-8020
Vincenzo Di LazzaroResearch Unit of Neurology, Neurophysiology and Neurobiology, Department of Medicine and Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveDespite diagnostic criteria refinements, Parkinson's disease (PD) clinical diagnosis still suffers from a not satisfying accuracy, with the post-mortem examination as the gold standard for diagnosis. Seminal clinicopathological series highlighted that a relevant number of patients alive-diagnosed with idiopathic PD have an alternative post-mortem diagnosis. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of PD comparing the in-vivo clinical diagnosis with the post-mortem diagnosis performed through the pathological examination in 2 groups.

methodsIn this retrospective case-control study, patients and healthy subjects who consented to the post-mortem pathological diagnosis at the UK Brain Bank were consecutively enrolled from the UK Brain Bank. Medical records were reviewed to classify participants and performance metrics were further calculated using neuropathological diagnosis as the gold standard.

resultsFour thousand five hundred seventy one subjects were eligible for the study. The clinical diagnosis group was: 1,048 Parkinson's patients and 1,242 healthy subjects. Pathology diagnosis group were: 996 Parkinson's patients and 1,288 subjects with no post-mortem abnormality. For the group of clinical diagnosis, PD diagnosis showed: sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 86%, accuracy of 90.96%, F1-Score 0.89, and a receiver operating characteristics area under the curve (ROC AUC) 0.925 (SE ± 0.006) [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.913, 0.937], 𝑝<0.001. In this group, the most frequent pathology diagnosis among clinically misdiagnosed PD (false positive) patients was dementia with Lewy bodies (19.4%). Conversely, the most frequent clinical diagnosis among PD missed clinical diagnosis (false negative) patients was Alzheimer's disease (18.5%).

interpretationOur findings confirm a still significant diagnostic error and emphasize the need for more fine and homogeneous criteria to classify idiopathic Parkinson's patients correctly. ANN NEUROL 2025;97:1110-1121.

Indexed as

BrainParkinson DiseaseTissue BanksAgedAged, 80 and overAutopsyCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID39871110
PMCPMC12082010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.