Update on Treatments for Parkinson's Disease Motor Fluctuations – An International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To update evidence-based medicine recommendations for treating motor fluctuations of Parkinson's disease (PD). BACKGROUND: The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Evidence Based Medicine in Movement Disorders Committee recommendations for the treatments of PD were first published in 2002 and regularly updated. The current review uses a new methodology, including the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and a modified version of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations). METHODS: On January 1, 2023, a literature search was conducted without date limit in the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases using the following search terms: Parkinson disease, levodopa and, for the Embase database, randomized controlled trial (RCT). The inclusion criteria for studies were: patients with PD, on oral levodopa therapy, experiencing motor fluctuations, investigating an intervention that was (commercially) available in at least one country, study design RCT, and with a follow-up duration of at least 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 102 studies were included. Levodopa extended release, pramipexole immediate release and extended release, ropinirole immediate release, rotigotine, opicapone, safinamide, and bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (DBS) were assessed as efficacious, and continuous intestinal levodopa infusion, continuous subcutaneous levodopa, continuous subcutaneous apomorphine, ropinirole prolonged release, ropinirole patch, entacapone, rasagiline, istradefylline, amantadine extended release, zonisamide, bilateral globus pallidus DBS, and pallidotomy were assessed as likely efficacious for the treatment of motor fluctuations in people with PD who are already being treated with levodopa. CONCLUSIONS: There are several treatment options that can improve motor fluctuations in PD. These recommendations will assist physicians and patients in determining which intervention to use. © 2025 The Author(s). 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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".