Novel Approach to Movement Disorder Society–Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Monitoring in Clinical Trials: Longitudinal Item Response Theory Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although nontremor and tremor Part 3 Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale items measure different impairment domains, their distinct progression and drug responsivity remain unstudied longitudinally. The total score may obscure important time-based and treatment-based changes occurring in the individual domains. OBJECTIVE: Using the unique advantages of item response theory (IRT), we developed novel longitudinal unidimensional and multidimensional models to investigate nontremor and tremor changes occurring in an interventional Parkinson's disease (PD) study. METHOD: With unidimensional longitudinal IRT, we assessed the 33 Part 3 item data (22 nontremor and 10 tremor items) of 336 patients with early PD from the STEADY-PD III (Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy Assessment of Isradipine for PD, placebo vs. isradipine) study. With multidimensional longitudinal IRT, we assessed the progression rates over time and treatment (in overall motor severity, nontremor, and tremor domains) using Markov Chain Monte Carlo implemented in Stan. RESULTS: Regardless of treatment, patients showed significant but different time-based deterioration rates for total motor, nontremor, and tremor scores. Isradipine was associated with additional significant deterioration over placebo in total score and nontremor scores, but not in tremor score. Further highlighting the 2 separate latent domains, nontremor and tremor severity changes were positively but weakly correlated (correlation coefficient, 0.108). CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal IRT analysis is a novel statistical method highly applicable to PD clinical trials. It addresses limitations of traditional linear regression approaches and previous IRT investigations that either applied cross-sectional IRT models to longitudinal data or failed to estimate all parameters simultaneously. It is particularly useful because it can separate nontremor and tremor changes both over time and in response to treatment interventions.
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 | 0.257 | 0.286 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".