The <i>Movement</i> Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective was to update previous evidence-based medicine reviews of treatments for motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease published between 2002 and 2005. Level I (randomized, controlled trial) reports of pharmacological, surgical, and nonpharmacological interventions for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease between January 2004 (2001 for nonpharmacological) and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion, clinical indications, ranking, efficacy conclusions, safety, and implications for clinical practice followed the original program outline and adhered to evidence-based medicine methodology. Sixty-eight new studies qualified for review. Piribedil, pramipexole, pramipexole extended release, ropinirole, rotigotine, cabergoline, and pergolide were all efficacious as symptomatic monotherapy; ropinirole prolonged release was likely efficacious. All were efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct except pramipexole extended release, for which there is insufficient evidence. For prevention/delay of motor fluctuations, pramipexole and cabergoline were efficacious, and for prevention/delay of dyskinesia, pramipexole, ropinirole, ropinirole prolonged release, and cabergoline were all efficacious, whereas pergolide was likely efficacious. Duodenal infusion of levodopa was likely efficacious in the treatment of motor complications, but the practice implication is investigational. Entacapone was nonefficacious as a symptomatic adjunct to levodopa in nonfluctuating patients and nonefficacious in the prevention/delay of motor complications. Rasagiline conclusions were revised to efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct, and as treatment for motor fluctuations. Clozapine was efficacious in dyskinesia, but because of safety issues, the practice implication is possibly useful. Bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation, bilateral globus pallidus stimulation, and unilateral pallidotomy were updated to efficacious for motor complications. Physical therapy was revised to likely efficacious as symptomatic adjunct therapy. This evidence-based medicine review updates the field and highlights gaps for research.
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 | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".