Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42499249›Full record

ArticleMovement disorders clinical practice2026

Machine Learning Prediction of Hoehn and Yahr Scores at 5-Years Post-

Xuehua Ye, Mette Niemann Johansen, Balazs Laczi, Mads Peter Horndrup, Michael Zaucha Sørensen, Rasmus Vestergård Madsen, Jan Wolber, Markus Lonsdale, Annemette Lokkegaard, Renee Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Movement disorders clinical practice, 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

10 authors.

Xuehua YeGE HealthCare, Chalfont Saint Giles, UK.
Mette Niemann JohansenDepartment of Neurology, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8534-6436
Balazs LacziGE HealthCare, Chalfont Saint Giles, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9345-7151
Mads Peter HorndrupDepartment of Neurology, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-8846-0099
Michael Zaucha SørensenDepartment of Neurology, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7215-2658
Rasmus Vestergård MadsenDepartment of Neurology, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3896-1344
Jan WolberGE HealthCare, Chalfont Saint Giles, UK.
Markus LonsdaleDepartment of Neurology, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2916-5293
Annemette LokkegaardDepartment of Neurology, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7543-6031
Renee MillerGE HealthCare, Chalfont Saint Giles, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4387-2813

Funding

GE Healthcare
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundParkinson's disease (PD) progression is highly heterogeneous, complicating clinical management and prognostication. While machine learning models have been developed using research datasets such as Parkinson's Precision Medicine Initiative (PPMI) and Parkinson's Disease Biomarkers Program (PDBP), their clinical translatability is limited due to differences in routinely collected data. The Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y) scale is commonly used in clinical practice to stage PD, yet most predictive models focus on less practical measures.

objectivesThis study developed and validated machine learning models to predict H&Y scores at 5 years post-123I-ioflupane single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging, leveraging both a real-world dataset and a subset of the PPMI cohort. The goal was to assess the utility of routinely collected clinical and imaging data for prognostic modeling.

methodsData from medical records and imaging were harmonized from 343 real-world patients and 134 PPMI patients, resulting in a merged dataset with 83 overlapping features. Random Forest and Gradient Boosting models were trained to predict 5-year H&Y scores using varying amounts of longitudinal data and imaging features.

resultsModels using 2 years of clinical follow-up data achieved the highest predictive accuracy. The most important predictors were early H&Y scores, gait symptom severity, and select imaging features.

conclusionsMachine learning models can predict 5-year H&Y scores in PD using real-world clinical data, but imaging features add limited prognostic value. This study demonstrated that implementing machine learning models, when using real-world data, did not significantly improve the already known gap between prognostic modeling and real-world implementation. Improvement of models is, however, a promising prospect and further studies are encouraged.

Indexed as

123I‐Ioflupaneclinical progressionmachine learningParkinson's disease

Identifiers

PMID42499249
PMCPMC13401059

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.