ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2026
Intelligent differentiation between Parkinson's disease and essential tremor using wearable sensors and machine learning: a temporal validation study.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundParkinson's disease (PD) and essential tremor (ET) are prevalent movement disorders with overlapping clinical presentations but divergent progression and treatment, underscoring the importance of accurate differential diagnosis. Current diagnosis mainly depends on neurologists' clinical rating scales, which is subjective, time-consuming and prone to high misdiagnosis rates. This study integrates wearable sensor technology with machine learning methodologies to facilitate more objective and precise discrimination between PD and ET.
methodsUsing standardized upper-limb motor tasks and wearable nine-axis inertial measurement units (IMU), kinematic data were collected from a total of 118 participants (93 in the development dataset and 25 in the temporally independent validation dataset) during task execution. After multi-dimensional feature extraction, feature selection and model training were performed within a 5 × 5 nested cross-validation framework. Temporal validation was conducted to simulate real-world clinical consultations and evaluate model generalizability over time. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) was used for model interpretation.
resultsThe XGBoost model with integrated tremor features outperformed all other tested models. In temporal validation, it achieved patient-level 88.00% accuracy (AUC = 0.8635) for resting tremor task and 92.00% accuracy (AUC = 0.9035) for postural tremor task, respectively. Patient-level SHAP analysis identified acceleration peak frequency and inter-axis correlation as core discriminative features consistent with clinical consensus, demonstrating favorable preliminary generalizability.
conclusionThis wearable-based machine learning approach with temporal validation shows encouraging performance and good interpretability in differentiating PD and ET. It is a promising single-center temporal validation study requiring further patient-level prospective multicenter validation.
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.