Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41281192›Full record

ArticleClinical parkinsonism & related disorders2025

A

Kayla Williams, Maurice A Curtis, Lisa Gombinsky, Priya Parmar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Kayla WilliamsDepartment of Statistics, the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Maurice A CurtisDepartment of Anatomy and Medical Imaging, and Centre for Brain Research, the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Lisa GombinskyUnruly Company, Neuro and Rehab Specialized Personal Training and Conductive Education, New Zealand.
Priya ParmarDepartment of Statistics, the University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This systematic review and Methods: We identified relevant articles by searching four online databases and reviewing citations. The primary outcomes included the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) or Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part IV and daily "ON" time; secondary outcomes included UPDRS/MDS-UPDRS III and IVa, Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS) total score, and daily "OFF" time. For each outcome, we conducted Results: We found associations between Amantadine and each motor outcome. The most considerable was an SMD of -0.73 points for Amantadine compared to control for the UPDRS/MDS-UPDRS IV at up to 16 weeks after beginning treatment ( Conclusion: Our findings suggest that Amantadine is an effective adjunct medication for improving LID and broader Parkinson's disease symptoms. However, evidence of its declining long-term efficacy and "adverseness" have important implications for its use in Parkinson's disease therapy.

Indexed as

AmantadineDrug therapyLevodopa-induced dyskinesiaMeta-analysisNeurological manifestationsParkinson’s diseaseSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41281192
PMCPMC12639294

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.