ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2025
Research progress of assessment tools for Parkinson's disease psychosis in China.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parkinson's disease psychosis (PDP) has a significant impact on the quality of life and disease prognosis of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Accurate assessment of psychotic symptoms in PD patients is critical for early detection and intervention. This, in turn, improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. This review evaluates both internationally validated and China-specific assessment tools for PDP, including the Parkinson's Psychosis Questionnaire, Geriatric Apathy Scale, and culturally adapted instruments. We analyze the psychometric properties, cultural applicability, and clinical utility of these tools in Chinese populations. Our findings provide evidence-based recommendations for healthcare professionals to optimize tool selection, enhance diagnostic accuracy, and guide targeted interventions in China's diverse clinical settings. The review also identifies gaps in current assessment approaches and proposes directions for future tool development and validation studies.
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.