ArticleNeurology and therapy2026
Towards a Better Definition of Patient-Centered Therapeutic Strategy of Parkinson's Disease: An Opinion Paper.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent Parkinson's disease (PD) treatment guidelines remain predominantly drug- and stage-centric and only inconsistently articulate a patient-centered medication strategy. We aimed to identify this gap and propose pragmatic, consensus-based principles for fully individualized, preference-sensitive pharmacological care across the patient journey. Seventeen movement disorder experts from eight European countries convened (March 2026) and generated key clinical questions spanning early to advanced PD. Panelists completed an anonymized questionnaire; semantic AI supported identification of areas of consensus and dissensus, followed by a single-round Delphi-style discussion to refine agreed statements. The panel reached consensus on eight statements across five focus areas: (i) incorporating patient characteristics and contextual factors underrepresented in guidelines (comorbidities, co-medications, behavioral/cognitive risk, non-motor symptom burden, and-when appropriate-genetics); (ii) treating therapy initiation as a longitudinal process with shared decision-making, education, and non-pharmacological foundations; (iii) legitimizing watchful waiting or dose reduction in selected scenarios; (iv) using both motor and non-motor symptoms and lifestyle goals as primary drivers of oral therapy selection; and (v) transparently managing evidence gaps while providing good-practice guidance on reassessment. Examples on how these recommendations can be used to plan a therapy strategy are presented for different patients' personae. In conclusion, a patient-centered medication strategy in PD should be explicit, structured, and revisited over time, aligning therapeutic choices with symptoms, risks, context, and individual goals and preferences. A wide range of treatments must always be available throughout the patient's care pathway to allow for greater individualization of care, particularly regarding treatment sequencing, drug combinations, and dosage thresholds. This requires new forms of validation beyond traditional standardized clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42870196What 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.