Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 523

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 116 of the 116 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease

Fox, Susan H., Katzenschlager, Regina, Lim, Shen‐Yang, Ravina, Bernard, Seppi, Klaus, Coelho, Miguel, Poewe, Werner, Rascol, Olivier, Goetz, Christopher G., Sampaio, Cristina·2011·Movement Disorders

Abstract

The objective was to update previous evidence‐based medicine reviews of treatments for motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease published between 2002 and 2005. Level I (randomized, controlled trial) reports of pharmacological, surgical, and nonpharmacological interventions for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease between January 2004 (2001 for nonpharmacological) and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion, clinical indications, ranking, efficacy conclusions, safety, and implications for clinical practice followed the original program outline and adhered to evidence‐based medicine methodology. Sixty‐eight new studies qualified for review. Piribedil, pramipexole, pramipexole extended release, ropinirole, rotigotine, cabergoline, and pergolide were all efficacious as symptomatic monotherapy; ropinirole prolonged release was likely efficacious. All were efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct except pramipexole extended release, for which there is insufficient evidence. For prevention/delay of motor fluctuations, pramipexole and cabergoline were efficacious, and for prevention/delay of dyskinesia, pramipexole, ropinirole, ropinirole prolonged release, and cabergoline were all efficacious, whereas pergolide was likely efficacious. Duodenal infusion of levodopa was likely efficacious in the treatment of motor complications, but the practice implication is investigational. Entacapone was nonefficacious as a symptomatic adjunct to levodopa in nonfluctuating patients and nonefficacious in the prevention/delay of motor complications. Rasagiline conclusions were revised to efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct, and as treatment for motor fluctuations. Clozapine was efficacious in dyskinesia, but because of safety issues, the practice implication is possibly useful. Bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation, bilateral globus pallidus stimulation, and unilateral pallidotomy were updated to efficacious for motor complications. Physical therapy was revised to likely efficacious as symptomatic adjunct therapy. This evidence‐based medicine review updates the field and highlights gaps for research. © 2011 Movement Disorder Society

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/mds.23829

Cites

116 of 116 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 116 references

Cited by

See all 523

Metadata

Authors
Fox, S. H., Katzenschlager, R., Lim, S., Ravina, B., Seppi, K., Coelho, M., Poewe, W., Rascol, O., Goetz, C. G., & Sampaio, C.
Venue
Movement Disorders
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-10
Volume
26
Issue
S3
Pages
S2-41
ISSN
  • 0885-3185 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-8257
OpenAlex
W4211223857
Cited by
523
References
116
FWCI
23.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mds.23829
The paper
Fox, S. H., Katzenschlager, R., Lim, S., Ravina, B., Seppi, K., Coelho, M., Poewe, W., Rascol, O., Goetz, C. G., & Sampaio, C. (2011). The Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Movement Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.23829

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.