ArticleEClinicalMedicine2026
Remote programming versus standard in-person programming following deep brain stimulation in patients with Parkinson's disease: a randomised controlled trial.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06078397 (Remote Programming for Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease), which is not on this 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.
Remote Programming for Deep Brain Stimulation in Parkinson's Disease: a Randomized Controlled Study
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Remote programming (RP) offers a convenient alternative for patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) who have undergone deep brain stimulation (DBS). However, its clinical efficacy remains underexplored. We aimed to compare the treatment effects of RP and in-person standard programming (SP) in this population. Methods: We conducted an open-label, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial at a single centre in China between October 2023 and February 2025. This study included PD patients who underwent bilateral subthalamic nucleus DBS surgery. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the RP or SP group. The primary outcome was the improvement rate in motor symptoms from baseline to 6-month follow-up, assessed using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). Secondary outcomes included changes in non-motor symptoms, quality of life, and patients' subjective experiences of the programming sessions. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06078397). Findings: A total of 50 patients were enrolled; 20 in the SP group and 21 in the RP group completed the 6-month follow-up. With a non-inferiority margin of 10%, the improvement rate in the total UPDRS-III score in the RP group was found to be non-inferior to that in the SP group, as the one-sided lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (-0.033) exceeded -0.100 (-10%). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in non-motor symptoms, quality of life, or subjective programming experiences (all p > 0.05). Interpretation: RP offers short-term motor improvements that are non-inferior to in-person SP in PD patients following DBS surgery, which also yields comparable outcomes in non-motor symptoms and quality of life. Funding: Dianyou Li was funded by Shanghai Municipal Health Commission (Grant No. 202140181), Shanghai Science and Technology Commission (Grant No. 22Y11903900), Guangci Innovative Technology Launch Program (Grant No. GCQH202205), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82571678 to D.L.); Xiaonan Wan was funded by King's College London-China Scholarship Council Scholarship.
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.