MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313857503 · doi:10.1002/mds.29308

Using Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Parts 2 and 3 Simultaneously: Combining the Patient Voice with Clinician Ratings

2023· article· en· W4313857503 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanyuan Guo, Christopher G. Goetz, Glenn T. Stebbins, Tiago Mestre, Sheng Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueMovement Disorders · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNIH Clinical CenterNational Institute on AgingParkinsonfonden
KeywordsRating scaleMovement disordersPhysical medicine and rehabilitationParkinson's diseasePsychologyMovement (music)Scale (ratio)AudiologyCognitive psychologyPsychiatryMedicineDiseaseDevelopmental psychologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Regulatory recommendations favor outcomes combining objective and patient input. The Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), the most commonly used scale in Parkinson's disease (PD), includes patient and investigator ratings in distinct parts, but original clinimetric analyses failed to confirm the validity of combining parts by simple summing. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to develop clinimetrically valid constructs for combining patient-reported Part 2 and investigator-rated Part 3 MDS-UPDRS scores. METHODS: Using 7888 MDS-UPDRS scores, we assessed construct validity of combined Part 2 and Part 3 items using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and graded item response theory (IRT) with threshold criteria: comparative fit index ≥0.9 (EFA) and discrimination parameters ≥0.65 (IRT). RESULTS: The direct sum of Parts 2 + 3 failed to meet the threshold for a valid outcome of PD severity (comparative fit index, CFI = 0.855). However, a two-domain construct combining item scores for tremor and non-tremor domains from Parts 2 and 3 confirmed validity, meeting both EFA and IRT criteria as distinct but correlated indices of disease severity (CFI = 0.923; discrimination mean 2.197 ± 0.480 [tremor] and 1.737 ± 0.344 [non-tremor] domains). CONCLUSIONS: The sum of Parts 2 + 3 is not clinimetrically sound. However, considering tremor and non-tremor items of both Parts 2 and 3 as two outcomes results in a valid summary of PD motor severity that leverages simultaneous patient- and investigator-derived measures. This analytic application addresses regulatory prioritizations and retains the well-validated MDS-UPDRS items. In future interventional trials, we suggest that tremor and non-tremor components of PD motor severity from Parts 2 + 3 be monitored and analyzed to accurately detect objective changes that integrate the patient's voice. © 2023 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMovement DisordersSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207