CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 235

Head injury and Parkinson's disease risk in twins

Goldman, Samuel M., Tanner, Caroline M., Oakes, David, Bhudhikanok, Grace S., Gupta, Anjali, Langston, J. William·2006·Annals of Neurology
DOI 10.1002/ana.20882
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: Head injury is an inconsistently reported risk factor for Parkinson's disease (PD). Many related variables might confound this association, such as differences in childhood and adolescent lifestyles or genetically determined risk‐taking behaviors. Twin studies circumvent some of these problems, because twins are genetically and environmentally much more similar than typical cases and control subjects. Methods: We conducted a case–control study in 93 twin pairs discordant for PD ascertained from the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council World War II Veteran Twins Cohort. Results: A prior head injury with amnesia or loss of consciousness was associated with an increased risk for PD (odds ratio, 3.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3–11; p = 0.014). Truncating observations 10 years before PD onset enhanced the association. Though less precise, the association was somewhat stronger in monozygotic than in dizygotic pairs. Risk increased further with a subsequent head injury (p trend = 0.022) and with head injuries requiring hospitalization. Duration of unconsciousness was not associated. In a subanalysis of 18 pairs concordant for PD, the twin with younger onset PD was more likely to have sustained a head injury, although numbers were small. Interpretation: Our results suggest that mild‐to‐moderate closed head injury may increase PD risk decades later. Ann Neurol 2006;

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ana.20882

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A study of 93 twin pairs discordant for PD replicated the association between head injury and PD with an OR of 3.8 (95% CI 1.3-11.0).

    “A study of 93 twin pairs who were discordant for PD replicated this association with a similarly large effect size (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.3–11.0) (56).”

    From Association of ALS with head injury, cigarette smoking and APOE genotypes (2010) · cites this paper as [56]

  • There are multiple biological mechanisms by which head injuries may trigger the molecular pathways leading to neuronal degeneration.

    “As previously discussed (56), there are multiple biological mechanisms by which head injuries may trigger the molecular pathways leading to neuronal degeneration.”

    From Association of ALS with head injury, cigarette smoking and APOE genotypes (2010) · cites this paper as [56]

  • The study data support the existence of a relatively long period of latency between injury and ALS onset, since head injuries up to 15 years before the reference date contributed to the observed increased odds of ALS.

    “Consistent with previous epidemiologic studies of head injury in PD (55;56) and ALS (21), our data also support the existence of a relatively long period of latency between injury and ALS onset, since head injuries up to 15 years before the reference date contributed to the observed increased odds of ALS.”

    From Association of ALS with head injury, cigarette smoking and APOE genotypes (2010) · cites this paper as [56]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goldman, S. M., Tanner, C. M., Oakes, D., Bhudhikanok, G. S., Gupta, A., & Langston, J. W.
Venue
Annals of Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-06-23
Volume
60
Issue
1
Pages
65-72
ISSN
  • 0364-5134
  • 1531-8249
DOI
10.1002/ana.20882
Cited by
235
References
1
Language
en
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review