MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416693187 · doi:10.5327/cbn240730

Epidemiological study on the prevalence of Parkinson’s disease, parkinsonism, and rem sleep behavior disorder in the community of Candangolândia - DF

2024· article· W4416693187 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simoneide Souza Titze de Almeida, Isabel Oliveira Araujo Moraes, Milena Vieira Ramos, Talita Guimarães Balieiro, Gustavo Henrique Campos de Sousa, J Guimarães, Marcelo Evangelista Lobo, Pedro Renato de Paula Brandão

Bibliographic record

VenueArquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyDiseasePopulationRating scaleDepression (economics)REM sleep behavior disorderBeck Depression Inventory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This study is part of the project: Prodromal and Overt Parkinson’s Disease Epidemiological Study in Brazil (PROBE-PD), which aims to determine the prevalence of Parkinson’s disease (PD) and other parkinsonian syndromes in individuals aged 60 and over within a population sample from the North, Northeast, South, and Midwest regions. Objective: To present partial results regarding the prevalence of PD, parkinsonism, and REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) in the community of Candangolândia-DF, Midwest region. Methods: This study, approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Beneficent Society of Ladies Hospital Sírio-Libanês (CEPesq/HSL-5.482.147), is conducted in two phases. In Phase I, screening is carried out using the Tanner Questionnaire, wherein volunteers respond to nine yes-or-no questions related to motor symptoms, and the Single-Question Questionnaire for RBD (RBD1Q). A positive screening is indicated by either two affirmative responses on the Tanner Questionnaire or one on the RBD1Q, prompting an invitation to Phase II, where participants undergo evaluation by a neurologist specializing in Movement Disorders. PD diagnosis follows the MDS Diagnostic Criteria, supported by the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS). The evaluation further includes the RBD Screening Questionnaire (RBDSQ), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II). Data are entered into RedCap for subsequent statistical analysis. Results are presented as frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations. Results: To date, 1253 individuals out of a target of 1500, with a mean age of 70.5±7.95 years have been screened between July 2022 and June 2024. Among these screened individuals, 63.6% were female. The prior diagnosis of PD was 1.8%, with 11.7% screened positive for suspected RBD and 34.6% for the Tanner questionnaire. Individuals screened positive for suspected RBD and Tanner, or previously diagnosed with PD, were invited to participate in Phase II. Following the clinical evaluation of 307 patients, preliminary prevalence was estimated at 1.67% for PD, 2.87% for parkinsonism of any cause, and 3.27% for probable/possible RBD. Conclusion: Of the individuals diagnosed with PD, 53.85% were male. The result reveal that although the relative proportion of males was lower than that of females, the prevalence of PD diagnoses was higher among males, corroborating existing literature reports. Continued data analysis and detailed clinical evaluations will provide a more precise understanding of the results found in the present study. These findings are crucial for informing and potentially adjusting public health policies in Brazil, aiming to improve early diagnosis and management of these neurodegenerative diseases. On behalf of PROBE-PD

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArquivos de Neuro-PsiquiatriaSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207