Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40862505›Full record

Trial reportMovement disorders clinical practice2026

The Feasibility and Practical Utility of Virtual Visits for Patients with Parkinson's Disease in Different World Regions.

Álvaro García-Bustillo, Jinyoung Youn, Jong Hyeon Ahn, Oluwadamilola Ojo, Njideka Okubadejo, Zakiyah Aldaajani, Mohamed Essam, Ali Shalash, Adriana Cardozo, Meredith Spindler and 2 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Movement disorders clinical practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Televisits for Parkinson's disease: benefits and barriers.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

12 authors.

Álvaro García-BustilloResearch Unit, Hospital Universitario Burgos, Burgos, Spain.
Jinyoung YounNeurology Department, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3350-5032
Jong Hyeon AhnNeurology Department, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6415-2316
Oluwadamilola OjoDepartment of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6461-2653
Njideka OkubadejoDepartment of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.
Zakiyah AldaajaniNeurology Department, King Fahad Medical Military Complex, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mohamed EssamNeurology Department, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Ali ShalashNeurology Department, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7012-5907
Adriana CardozoNeurology Department, Hospital de Clinicas, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Meredith SpindlerNeurology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Mariland, USA.
Zoltan MariNeurology Department, Cleveland Clinic Lou Ruvo Center for Brain Health, Las Vegas, USA.
Esther CuboResearch Unit, Hospital Universitario Burgos, Burgos, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0018-1182

Funding

Edmond J. Safra Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOvercoming existing access barriers is crucial for better-specialized health care of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD).

objectiveThe aim of the study was to compare the access and visit quality/acceptability between in-office and virtual telemedicine visits.

methodsThis was an international, randomized, case-control, prospective, observational study. Patients were randomly assigned either to the control group (in-person/in-office visits at baseline, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months) or to the study group (in-office visits at baseline, 6, and 12 months, and telemedicine visits at 3 and 9 months). Telemedicine visits were conducted using videoconferencing apps that were readily accessible to the patient/caregivers. Outcomes were feasibility, usability, and the noninferiority of telemedicine compared to in-office visits in PD patients regarding clinical progression and initiation of pharmacological/nonpharmacological treatments over 1-year follow-up.

resultsWe included 209 PD patients from 6 countries (Nigeria, Spain, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Egypt, and Uruguay), mean age 64.9 ± 12.2 years, 59% males, median Hoehn & Yahr stage 2 (1-4). Overall, disease progression (MDS-Unified PD rating scale), quality of life (PD-Quality of life 39-items) scores, and therapeutic changes were similar in both groups. After 1 year, 124 patients 48.3%, (control group) and 52.1% (study group) completed the visits (P = 0.52), with a similar high rate of patient's satisfaction with the visits (P = 0.57).

conclusionsThis study represents real-world telemedicine practice in different world regions using a telemedicine approach complementary to in-person visits. Based on these results, feasibility, clinical management, PD disease progression, and patient's quality of life are similar when using telemedicine versus in-office visits. Future research should explore ways to integrate different healthcare technologies for long-term PD management.

Indexed as

Parkinson DiseaseTelemedicineAgedCase-Control StudiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOffice VisitsPatient SatisfactionProspective StudiesVideoconferencingmultidisciplinary teamParkinson's diseasetelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID40862505
PMCPMC12911519

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.