Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 506

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Time to redefine PD? Introductory statement of the MDS Task Force on the definition of Parkinson's disease

Open access
Berg, Daniela, Postuma, Ronald B., Bloem, Bastiaan, Chan, Piu, Dubois, Bruno, Gasser, Thomas, Goetz, Christopher G., Halliday, Glenda M., Hardy, John, Lang, Anthony E., Litvan, Irene, Marek, Kenneth, Obeso, José, Oertel, Wolfgang, Olanow, C. Warren, Poewe, Werner, Stern, Matthew, Deuschl, Günther·2014·Movement Disorders

Abstract

With advances in knowledge disease, boundaries may change. Occasionally, these changes are of such a magnitude that they require redefinition of the disease. In recognition of the profound changes in our understanding of Parkinson's disease (PD), the International Parkinson and Movement Disorders Society (MDS) commissioned a task force to consider a redefinition of PD. This review is a discussion article, intended as the introductory statement of the task force. Several critical issues were identified that challenge current PD definitions. First, new findings challenge the central role of the classical pathologic criteria as the arbiter of diagnosis, notably genetic cases without synuclein deposition, the high prevalence of incidental Lewy body (LB) deposition, and the nonmotor prodrome of PD. It remains unclear, however, whether these challenges merit a change in the pathologic gold standard, especially considering the limitations of alternate gold standards. Second, the increasing recognition of dementia in PD challenges the distinction between diffuse LB disease and PD. Consideration might be given to removing dementia as an exclusion criterion for PD diagnosis. Third, there is increasing recognition of disease heterogeneity, suggesting that PD subtypes should be formally identified; however, current subtype classifications may not be sufficiently robust to warrant formal delineation. Fourth, the recognition of a nonmotor prodrome of PD requires that new diagnostic criteria for early‐stage and prodromal PD should be created; here, essential features of these criteria are proposed. Finally, there is a need to create new MDS diagnostic criteria that take these changes in disease definition into consideration. © 2014 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Parkinson and 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.25844

Cites

63 of 63 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 63 references

Cited by

See all 506

Metadata

Authors
Berg, D., Postuma, R. B., Bloem, B., Chan, P., Dubois, B., Gasser, T., Goetz, C. G., Halliday, G. M., Hardy, J., Lang, A. E., Litvan, I., Marek, K., Obeso, J., Oertel, W., Olanow, C. W., Poewe, W., Stern, M., & Deuschl, G.
Venue
Movement Disorders
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-03-11
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
454-462
ISSN
  • 0885-3185 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-8257
OpenAlex
W2164028779
Cited by
506
References
63
FWCI
32.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Time to redefine PD? Introductory statement of the MDS Task Force on the definition of Parkinson's disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/mds.25844
The paper
Berg, D., Postuma, R. B., Bloem, B., Chan, P., Dubois, B., Gasser, T., Goetz, C. G., Halliday, G. M., Hardy, J., Lang, A. E., Litvan, I., Marek, K., Obeso, J., Oertel, W., Olanow, C. W., Poewe, W., Stern, M., & Deuschl, G. (2014). Time to redefine PD? Introductory statement of the MDS Task Force on the definition of Parkinson's disease. Movement Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1002/mds.25844

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.