Regular Exercise, Quality of Life, and Mobility in Parkinson’s Disease: A Longitudinal Analysis of National Parkinson Foundation Quality Improvement Initiative Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Research-based exercise interventions improve health-related quality of life (HRQL) and mobility in people with Parkinson's disease (PD). OBJECTIVE: To examine whether exercise habits were associated with changes in HRQL and mobility over two years. METHODS: We identified a cohort of National Parkinson Foundation Quality Improvement Initiative (NPF-QII) participants with three visits. HRQL and mobility were measured with the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) and Timed Up and Go (TUG). We compared self-reported regular exercisers (≥2.5 hours/week) with people who did not exercise 2.5 hours/week. Then we quantified changes in HRQL and mobility associated with 30-minute increases in exercise, across PD severity, using mixed effects regression models. RESULTS: Participants with three observational study visits (n = 3408) were younger, with milder PD, than participants with fewer visits. After 2 years, consistent exercisers and people who started to exercise regularly after their baseline visit had smaller declines in HRQL and mobility than non-exercisers (p < 0.05). Non-exercisers worsened by 1.37 points on the PDQ-39 and a 0.47 seconds on the TUG per year. Increasing exercise by 30 minutes/week was associated with slower declines in HRQL (-0.16 points) and mobility (-0.04 sec). The benefit of exercise on HRQL was greater in advanced PD (-0.41 points) than mild PD (-0.14 points; p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Consistently exercising and starting regular exercise after baseline were associated with small but significant positive effects on HRQL and mobility changes over two years. The greater association of exercise with HRQL in advanced PD supports improving encouragement and facilitation of exercise in advanced PD.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".