Revisiting the 2015 MDS diagnostic criteria for Parkinson disease: insights from autopsy-confirmed cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2015 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Diagnostic criteria for Parkinson Disease are based on expert consensus opinion and defines core motor features, 'Absolute Exclusion Criteria' and a balance of 'Supportive Criteria' and 'Red Flags'. To assess validity of each criterion in pathologically-confirmed cases, a scoping literature review between 1988-2024 using search terms for clinicopathological PD and atypical parkinsonian disorders identified 28 articles. Supportive criteria were higher in PD, with excellent levodopa response and rest tremor most useful. Absolute exclusion criteria and red flags were present more often in atypical parkinsonian disorders. However, supranuclear gaze palsy, rapid progression of gait impairment to wheelchair requirement and bilateral symptoms were reported in >5% PD. Data was limited by few appropriate pathological studies with sufficient clinical data; challenges in applying highly-specific definitions to retrospective studies and likely co-pathologies. This review provides empiric data to support some items of the MDS Criteria with future potential refinement.
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 | 0.009 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".