Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42494717›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2026

Clinical and Cost-Effectiveness of the "UCL Live Well With Parkinson's" Toolkit: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

Anette Schrag, Kumud Kantilal, Tasmin Rookes, Benjamin Gardner, Gareth Ambler, Rachael Hunter, Nathan Davies, Catherine Atkinson, Patricia Schartau, Mariam Adeleke and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

14 authors.

Anette SchragDepartment of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, University College London, London, UK.
Kumud KantilalResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Tasmin RookesResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Benjamin GardnerSchool of Psychology, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK.
Gareth AmblerDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.
Rachael HunterResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Nathan DaviesCentre for Psychiatry and Mental Health, Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Catherine AtkinsonHomerton Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Patricia SchartauResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Mariam AdelekeDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, UK.
Lina GonzalezResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Jiunn WangResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Maria CarmodyResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.
Kate WaltersResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Self-management approaches in people with Parkinson's disease (PD) have potential to improve patient outcomes and reduce complications leading to hospital admissions. We aimed to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Methods: This two-arm randomised controlled trial in England (Trial Registration: ISRCTN92831552) recruited community-dwelling people with PD from NHS sites and self-referral. They were randomly assigned to the intervention or treatment as usual (TAU), and assessed at baseline, 6- and 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome was the PDQ-39 score, a PD-specific health-related quality of life measure, at 12-months with planned subgroup analyses. Secondary outcomes included non-motor and motor activities of daily living (MDS-UPDRS part I&II), utility values and QALYs derived from the EQ-5D-5L, and total health and social care costs over 12-months. The economic evaluation was based on cost-utility analysis using cost per QALY. All assessors were blinded to group allocation. Analysis was by intention to treat. Findings: 166 participants were randomised to the intervention and 180 to TAU, with 12-month follow-up assessments available in 141 (84.9%) and 164 (91.1%), respectively. The primary endpoint (PDQ-39 score) was similar for patients in the intervention and TAU groups (-1.03; 95% CI (-3.03 to 0.97)). Subgroup analyses of PDQ-39 scores in underserved groups however favoured the intervention (-4.0; 95% CI (-6.8 to -1.1)). The combined MDS-UPDRS part I + II score was improved in the intervention compared to the TAU group (-2.61; 95% CI (-4.58 to -0.64)). QALYs were not different between groups (0.018; 95% CI (-0.006 to 0.042) but total health and social care costs over 12-months were lower in the intervention group compared to TAU (-£1282; 95% CI (-£2700 to -£118)), driven mainly by reduced unplanned hospital admissions. Adverse events were similar in both groups. The Interpretation: The Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research RP-PG-1016-20001.

Indexed as

DigitalInterventionNon-pharmacologicalParkinson's diseaseRandomised controlled trialSelf-management

Identifiers

PMID42494717
PMCPMC13392959

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.