<i>Movement</i> Disorder Society Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale experiences in daily living: Longitudinal changes and correlation with other assessments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) commissioned a revision of the UPDRS with the goals of improving instructions and definitions, more accurately evaluating milder features, and assessing patient-reported outcomes and nonmotor features. To date, no study has evaluated longitudinal changes in components of the MDS-UPDRS over time or correlated these with changes in other scales of various symptoms. We assessed Parts I and II of the MDS-UPDRS (non-Motor and Motor Experiences of Daily Living [nM-EDL, M-EDL]) as well as a number of other scales of motor, cognitive and behavioral function in a large population of patients (n = 383) with early- to mid-stage Parkinson's disease (PD) who had previously participated in a trial of a putative disease-modifying agent. Both parts of a MDS-UPDRS showed significant change over the 3-year follow-up period, with M-EDL scores declining to a greater extent than nM-EDL. Both the scores and their changes over time correlated relatively well with other rating scales of similar disease aspects. Modest correlations with the original version of the UPDRS supported the increased attention to nonmotor symptoms as well as milder levels of severity in the MDS-UPDRS. The M-EDL was much more sensitive to change over time in these early- to mid-stage patients than the original UPDRS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scale. Finally, we showed no change over time in a small group of individuals with dopamine transporter single-photon emission computed tomography scans without evidence for dopamine deficiency. The nM-EDL and M-EDL components of the MDS-UPDRS provide an effective, relevant measure of change in the broad spectrum of symptoms of PD over the first decade of the disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".