Prevalence and Incidence of Parkinson's Disease in Latin America: A Meta‐Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease (PD) is a rapidly growing neurodegenerative disorder, but up-to-date epidemiological data are lacking in Latin America. We sought to estimate the prevalence and incidence of PD and parkinsonism in Latin America. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Scientific Electronic Library Online, and Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde or the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature databases for epidemiological studies reporting the prevalence or incidence of PD or parkinsonism in Latin America from their inception to 2022. Quality of studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. Data were pooled via random-effects meta-analysis and analyzed by data source (cohort studies or administrative databases), sex, and age group. Significant differences between groups were determined by meta-regression. RESULTS: Eighteen studies from 13 Latin American countries were included in the review. Meta-analyses of 17 studies (nearly 4 million participants) found a prevalence of 472 (95% CI, 271-820) per 100,000 and three studies an incidence of 31 (95% CI, 23-40) per 100,000 person-years for PD; and seven studies found a prevalence of 4300 (95% CI, 1863-9613) per 100,000 for parkinsonism. The prevalence of PD differed by data source (cohort studies, 733 [95% CI, 427-1255] vs. administrative databases. 114 [95% CI, 63-209] per 100,000, P < 0.01), age group (P < 0.01), but not sex (P = 0.73). PD prevalence in ≥60 years also differed significantly by data source (cohort studies. 1229 [95% CI, 741-2032] vs. administrative databases, 593 [95% CI, 480-733] per 100,000, P < 0.01). Similar patterns were observed for parkinsonism. CONCLUSIONS: The overall prevalence and incidence of PD in Latin America were estimated. PD prevalence differed significantly by the data source and age, but not sex. © 2023 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of 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 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 | 0.020 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.053 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".